Colloidal silver for everyone!
 

On Sep 8, 6:18 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

If you really were "frequently called on to tune towers" then you must
have had a method. Maybe you could explain this tuning method. There are
always times when you go to tune some circuit or box or tower and it
does not tune up right. Maybe you have a notable example of when things
did not go right and you had to change methods or trouble shoot the
tower/coupling circuits before it would tune up?

The method for tuning a tower is to design based on wavelength a
theroretical ATU tuning circuit based on line impedance (typically 50 or 52
ohms for coax fed towers) and the calculated base impedence of the tower.
Then, using either the actual transmitter, or an RF signal generator, RF is
fed to the tower throug an OIB and the impedence and reactance are measured.

Frequently you have a close match, and only slight adjustments of the coil
in the ATU are needed (most ATUs use strappable coils, but fixed vacuum
caps) will bring it into match. One of the issues that makes tuning harder
today is the desire to have the tower as broadband as possible. Many older
ATUs had an easy to adjust high Q network, but today most stations want a
broader bandwidth ATU, which makes the best tuning point harder to find.
Many engineers will begin with an OIB read at points a quarter of the way
from each end of the coil's winding.... this gives you an idea of which way
to go to get a match. Once the tuning area is reduced, then "half way
between" steps are usually used.

Most ATUs are not built by station staff. One either provides a measurement
made with an RF generator and a bridge (Some bridges have an RF generator
incorporated) or the description of the tower in electrical degrees at the
frequency and the fabricator, like Kintronics, will ship an ATU built for
the tower.

On directionals, most are designed by consulting engneers, and the phasors
are built by one of two or three fabricators like Kintronics. While not used
in the US, many simple directionals elsewhere are done by means of a dual
coax feed, of equal electrical length, which goes to each of two towers,
with just the spacing in degrees determining directionality.

This does not adress towers tuned by methods other than series fed base fed
towers. There are shunt fed and unipole antennas, both of which are not
insulated from ground at the tower base. And there are direct fed antennas,
mostly foded L's and T's, that are fed without an ATU right off the final
tank circuit of the transmitter, with the vertical component of the L or T
being the radiator and the horizontal portion becomeing a top hat or "top
load" to simulate greater electrical height.

My tricks for tower tuning included, 1. do not do it when there is a single
cloud. 2. do not do it when there are any atmospherics. 3. wear boots at all
times. 4. have a positive indication, such as a light bulb on a long cord,
whether the transmitter is plates on or plates off 5. never do this work
alone. 6. when I was doing it, I always carried my CEI slide rule for
calculations 6. watch out for cattle, goats and, especially, geese. Geese
bite.



You gave a very weak "someone else's explanation." I'm not asking hard
questions of you. I just want to know whether you understand the
terminology you use to make a point. You make many posts to the news
group. You should know what you are talking about. I suggest you sit
down with an engineer and have him explain them to you.

Actually, after I posted, I went to our engineering office to get the NAB
Engineering Handbook, and brought up the simple question "what is mV/m"
since it is a daily use term; both of the engineers present gave the same
definition I gave you: it expresses the field strength of a signal at a
particular point or along a particular contour.

And these are engineers who install and maintain and modify the transmitters
for 5 stations (All with HD), two of them with backup sites, 16 studios,
network feeds to one 28 station and another 12 station network, dozens of
remotes, remote TV studios for out talent who are on TV daily, and all the
related routers, processing, redundant STL systems, earthquake and disaster
preparedness installations like alternate studios and genny sets as well as
a 50 kw 5 tower, 2 pattern directional that is diplexed with another high
power AM only 130 kHz higher on the band... all of which use a counterpoise
ground that has acres of copper webbing, silver-soldered and clamped, 12
meters above ground!

Oh man, I'm embarrassed for you. How long did it take you to write
this? I knew we had a chump on our hands, but you're the uber-chump.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

On Sep 8, 6:19 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...



Quite honestly, why would I worry about what anyone on this ng thinks?
It's
fun to participate, and for every loon like you and Telamon and the
deranged
Steve, there is a worthy debater like Mr. Maus. But in the overall
picture
of things, nothing said here matters.

You seem to put a lot of effort into something that does not matter.

Lot's of fun things don't matter. Scoring higher than the last time at Doom
is fun... but it has no significance.

Yes, but it's odd that nothing you do is significant. Most people
would be troubled by that, but I guess you don't care so long as
you're stocked up on HGH.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

On Sep 8, 7:58 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Steve" wrote in message

oups.com...



I think I'll stay in Boise because I know you're IN one of those
toilet stalls, tapping your feet...

You seem to know a lot about it. The breaking news is that your congressman
wants to defend his seat.... unfortunately, he was referring to a toilet
seat.

Wow. You seem to know this congressman very, very well.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

On Sep 8, 7:57 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...





In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

There was no test at all. Never took a driver's test, either. A
properly
processed application for either required no test.

You have stated this several times and it does not pass the smell test.
Why would any country issue a license to broadcast or transmit without
a
proficiency test. The same goes for driving.

You don't get it, do you? The alternative to taking a driving test was to
make a gift of money to the appropriate person. It was SOP to put a S/.50
bill inside the license "brevet" which would be extracted as "fine
payment"
if stopped; the alternative would be to have one's car impounded.

As to ham licenses, believe it or not, but some countries think that ham
operation is just like CB operation. The license is given to whoever
wants
one.

I have never done business in central or south America other than take
vacations there so no I don't get it. The car driver license is a safety
issue and the communications license can be a national security issue
that you would think the governments would want to keep under control. I
can't see them just handing them out for payola.

I'd remind you, in the radio context, that General Tire lost some licenses
and had to sell all the others for the RKO radio and TV operations they
owned because they were convicted of doing business in Argentina, Libya and
several other nations on the basis of payoffs to officials. The defense that
"business is only done that way" did not help, as it is in contradiction to
American law... but it illustrates that not much of anything went on in the
60's or 70's in much of the third world without baksheesh.

To a government official in Ecuador making $60 a month, getting $50 for each
expedited driver license is the basis for surviving. Police could not live
without the "tips" that caused a speedy resolution of traffic violations.

Things are not seen from such an altruistic point of view as you expect.
Fees to the government are for revenue, not safety or security. "Tips" to
employees were an expected token of appreciation and to the contrary,
paperwork sat for eons on official's desks. Since there was little payment
of income tax, the government got revenue from import taxes and "stamps" on
every document, from a marriage license to a new telephone line order. Once
the government got those fees, there was not much concern for how the
employees might benefit as well..

As to ham licenses, we are talking about a country where, when I asked for
the first commercial FM licenses, I was told that there was no system to
grant same... but that such a system could be created were I to desire.
Worry about ham licenses was non-existent and ham radio considered a quirk
of the wealthy for which they should pay, not pass a test. Radio stations
were never inspected; I operated HCFV1, licensed to 805 kHz, on 810 for half
a decade (to avoid hetting with TWR in Bonaire) and nobody in the government
noticed. Had they noticed, a change would have been granted cheerfully for a
modest fee.

Ecuadorian travelers, who usually left with empty suitcases one inside
another like Russian nesting dolls, returned with thousands of dollars in
clothing, toys, gifts, appliances and such. Usually, a few S/.100 bills were
placed on the top of the contents inside each bag. Once the bills were
harvested, the returning passenger was cleared in customs.- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Good grief. This one was just pathetic, like something out of an old B-
grade movie. Surely you can do better than that.

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

David Eduardo wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
...

OK, maybe I frame questions badly. Radio waves are EM waves where the
volts per meter (V/m) is a measurement of the E field. You could
measure similar for the magnetic field (H/m) since in a far field the
energy is equal in the E and H fields. Since radios waves are the same
thing as light waves where photons that have no mass are the carries of
or direct these fields. The E field measured as V/m is just a vector
and if the terms are squared so that the area is considered
perpendicular to the direction of travel and you also take in account
the impedance of free space you can then calculate the power of that EM
wave per meter squared at some distance from the tower.

I doubt if one broadcast engineer in a thousand could state that. At radio
stations, we are talking about 10% theory and 90% practical aplication... if
that. It is beyond any practical application, photons and all.

What you have to understand is that the heavey hitting is done by consulting
engineers, who will design the directional systems and even put together
most FCC applications. The station engineers often do not even install DAs,
and are somewhat like the contractor who gets designs from an architect; we
do not know why a certain mixs of concreat, or diameter or rebar or specific
sort of I-beam is specified, but we know how to build from the design specs
and make it work.

Again, what is important to a station engineer is to comply with the license
and the rules. DAs must have the right null depth. Occupied bandwidth,
harmonic separation, s/n, THD and such must meet FCC requrements. And when
all else is done, there must be "good engineering practice" ranging from
proper grounding, well dressed cable, interlocks functioning, fences around
tower bases, etc.

The objective is keeping the licensed facility operating within the maximum
parameters of the license so that management can program and sell
advertising and the owners can make a profit. Some of us have built
transmitters, exciters, processers, but most of us use stuff right out of
texts and the NAB or even ARRL handbooks, not new designs. Those who do
create new designs go on to be equipment manufacturers like Frank Foti of
processing fame or the late John Pate who created remote control and audio
devices after being a CE at WSM, Nashville Network, WERC (where I worked
with him) and WMCA.

Our use of signal strength is primarily to know if we are operating legally.
Management uses it to know where they can expect, if programming is right,
to get audiences... and where they can't.

So from this the lines on the broadcast maps are not a boundary where
on one side you have good and on the other side poor reception.

If you think I said that, I appologize. I said most measured FM listening,
for example, was inside the 64 dBu contour. In fact, 80% is in the 70 dBu
contour and another 15% in the area between that and the 64. Obviously,
population density is a factor in each area... a rimshot like KQMR and KOMR
in Phoenix get about 80% of their listening between the 70 and the 64
because the 70's on each of these cover mostly desert... but the rule stands
on the average station... given equal population density, reported listening
falls off as the signal falls below 70 dBu and is almost non-existent by the
time you get to the 64. Is that clearer?

Also obvious, but apparently not understood is the fact that listening data
is granular only to the ZIP code level. Some ZIPS may be bisected by one of
these contours. and some may have a 70 dBu in one part and, behind a hill,
nothing. So the studies I have done and those I have seen elsewhere tend to
take data from multiple ratings periods, such as a year, and look for total
diary counts over such a period. And no matter how many years of data you
analyze, there is pretty much no listening beyond the signal intensity
levels I have mentioned.

This is not a matter of having contours mean that there are abosolutes, like
moats in the sky, but that a station will certainly not spend money to put
up billboards or do promotional events in areas where the signal is not good
enough to get listenership. This is what I mean by programmers and managers
looking at signal contours to see where there is potential for audience
generation and where all efforts will be useless.

We don't spend a lot of time on photons and light waves. It's knowledge that
does not contribute to the business and can really be distracting.

The
energy of the EM wave falls off as a square of the distance in theory
(but somewhat more in reality due to other factors) and so these lines
do not behave as if they are some kind of demographic line as your
posts appear to indicate.

Gee, you mean you have to quadruple the power to double the coverage area?
How amazing. I think I learned that when I was about 13. The ´practical
application of this is to demonstrate to the non-technical manager (about
99.9% of them) that raising the power by 10% will probably not be cost
effective... 50% maybe, depending on population, and by even more, likely. I
remember the expectations of the non technical staff at our New York FM when
we went from 610 to 660 watts on the ESB... somehow they thought they would
get 10% more coverage.

Theoretical hand waving aside the empirical data I posted that you
rejected out of hand from an expensive receiver was used by me because
it has a good linear power meter. Readings from it show the relative
field power received from a single turn interior loop antenna of low
gain. In addition I related those readings to a hand held portable
radio used indoors. In addition to that I also compared the reception
of a car radio. Only good reception on all three counted toward the
number of stations I considered as strong noise/interference free
stations as measured in broad daylight. My recollection was you stated
everyone had on average three stations and I reported something like 11
or 13.

And my point is that there is little listening to many of the stations you
cited as recievable. This is because they are not at a level that the
average listener finds to be "listenable" and they do not use the stations.
You might be interested in a site run by one of the engineering firms (that
produces software for coverage contours, interference studies, etc) that
shows field strength by ZIP code for the entire USA: There is an enormous
correlation between ratings data and these calculated contours in each
place.

http://www.v-soft.com/ZipSignal/default.htm

I hope this sheds some light on how your posting behavior looks to me.
It's not good and most other people reading the news group are of the
same opinion.

The only difference is that radio broadcasting is a practical application of
technology, not a place where theory is examined daily.

Holy s**t, that was certainly a load from you, oh fake 1.

David Gleason Presents: Spirit of the Forest Ginseng!!
 

Folks, David Gleason's ginseng is a very unique and complex plant. In
the wild a root can grow for 100 years or more, most roots however
mature in 15 to 20 years. Cultivated roots, depending on how and where
they grow, need 5 to 10 years to produce quality root.

Most of the ginseng on the market is only three or four years old and
has required frequent spraying of synthetic fungicides. This root can
be purchased for less than 20 dollars a pound, it requires large
quantities and always produces inferior results.

We are growers and buyers of wild and cultivated ginseng from the
parking lot of Univision Radio. Ginseng from this parking lot has a
reputation for being the best and always commands a premium price.

For our products we select only the best roots purchased directly from
the grower or wildcrafter. These roots are then processed with our
three stage cold extract process. This method preserves the unique and
subtle qualities of ginseng and produces an extract with ginseng
compounds that are identical to those found in the actual plant
tissues.

Whether you're curious about ginseng and want to try it for the first
time or maybe you've tried ginseng before, we urge you to try the real
thing.

Ginseng with the special quality we call the Spirit of the Forest

Order Now!!

Try David Gleason's Colloidal Silver!!
 

On Sep 8, 9:49 pm, "David Eduardo" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...



OK, maybe I frame questions badly. Radio waves are EM waves where the
volts per meter (V/m) is a measurement of the E field. You could
measure similar for the magnetic field (H/m) since in a far field the
energy is equal in the E and H fields. Since radios waves are the same
thing as light waves where photons that have no mass are the carries of
or direct these fields. The E field measured as V/m is just a vector
and if the terms are squared so that the area is considered
perpendicular to the direction of travel and you also take in account
the impedance of free space you can then calculate the power of that EM
wave per meter squared at some distance from the tower.

I doubt if one broadcast engineer in a thousand could state that. At radio
stations, we are talking about 10% theory and 90% practical aplication... if
that. It is beyond any practical application, photons and all.

What you have to understand is that the heavey hitting is done by consulting
engineers, who will design the directional systems and even put together
most FCC applications. The station engineers often do not even install DAs,
and are somewhat like the contractor who gets designs from an architect; we
do not know why a certain mixs of concreat, or diameter or rebar or specific
sort of I-beam is specified, but we know how to build from the design specs
and make it work.

Again, what is important to a station engineer is to comply with the license
and the rules. DAs must have the right null depth. Occupied bandwidth,
harmonic separation, s/n, THD and such must meet FCC requrements. And when
all else is done, there must be "good engineering practice" ranging from
proper grounding, well dressed cable, interlocks functioning, fences around
tower bases, etc.

The objective is keeping the licensed facility operating within the maximum
parameters of the license so that management can program and sell
advertising and the owners can make a profit. Some of us have built
transmitters, exciters, processers, but most of us use stuff right out of
texts and the NAB or even ARRL handbooks, not new designs. Those who do
create new designs go on to be equipment manufacturers like Frank Foti of
processing fame or the late John Pate who created remote control and audio
devices after being a CE at WSM, Nashville Network, WERC (where I worked
with him) and WMCA.

Our use of signal strength is primarily to know if we are operating legally.
Management uses it to know where they can expect, if programming is right,
to get audiences... and where they can't.



So from this the lines on the broadcast maps are not a boundary where
on one side you have good and on the other side poor reception.

If you think I said that, I appologize. I said most measured FM listening,
for example, was inside the 64 dBu contour. In fact, 80% is in the 70 dBu
contour and another 15% in the area between that and the 64. Obviously,
population density is a factor in each area... a rimshot like KQMR and KOMR
in Phoenix get about 80% of their listening between the 70 and the 64
because the 70's on each of these cover mostly desert... but the rule stands
on the average station... given equal population density, reported listening
falls off as the signal falls below 70 dBu and is almost non-existent by the
time you get to the 64. Is that clearer?

Also obvious, but apparently not understood is the fact that listening data
is granular only to the ZIP code level. Some ZIPS may be bisected by one of
these contours. and some may have a 70 dBu in one part and, behind a hill,
nothing. So the studies I have done and those I have seen elsewhere tend to
take data from multiple ratings periods, such as a year, and look for total
diary counts over such a period. And no matter how many years of data you
analyze, there is pretty much no listening beyond the signal intensity
levels I have mentioned.

This is not a matter of having contours mean that there are abosolutes, like
moats in the sky, but that a station will certainly not spend money to put
up billboards or do promotional events in areas where the signal is not good
enough to get listenership. This is what I mean by programmers and managers
looking at signal contours to see where there is potential for audience
generation and where all efforts will be useless.

We don't spend a lot of time on photons and light waves. It's knowledge that
does not contribute to the business and can really be distracting.

The
energy of the EM wave falls off as a square of the distance in theory
(but somewhat more in reality due to other factors) and so these lines
do not behave as if they are some kind of demographic line as your
posts appear to indicate.

Gee, you mean you have to quadruple the power to double the coverage area?
How amazing. I think I learned that when I was about 13. The ´practical
application of this is to demonstrate to the non-technical manager (about
99.9% of them) that raising the power by 10% will probably not be cost
effective... 50% maybe, depending on population, and by even more, likely.. I
remember the expectations of the non technical staff at our New York FM when
we went from 610 to 660 watts on the ESB... somehow they thought they would
get 10% more coverage.



Theoretical hand waving aside the empirical data I posted that you
rejected out of hand from an expensive receiver was used by me because
it has a good linear power meter. Readings from it show the relative
field power received from a single turn interior loop antenna of low
gain. In addition I related those readings to a hand held portable
radio used indoors. In addition to that I also compared the reception
of a car radio. Only good reception on all three counted toward the
number of stations I considered as strong noise/interference free
stations as measured in broad daylight. My recollection was you stated
everyone had on average three stations and I reported something like 11
or 13.

And my point is that there is little listening to many of the stations you
cited as recievable. This is because they are not at a level that the
average listener finds to be "listenable" and they do not use the stations.
You might be interested in a site run by one of the engineering firms (that
produces software for coverage contours, interference studies, etc) that
shows field strength by ZIP code for the entire USA: There is an enormous
correlation between ratings data and these calculated contours in each
place.

http://www.v-soft.com/ZipSignal/default.htm



I hope this sheds some light on how your posting behavior looks to me.
It's not good and most other people reading the news group are of the
same opinion.

The only difference is that radio broadcasting is a practical application of
technology, not a place where theory is examined daily.

It seems to be a place where you examine your navel daily.

David Gleason Presents: Spirit of the Forest Ginseng!!
 

Steve wrote:

Folks, David Gleason's ginseng is a very unique and complex plant. In
the wild a root can grow for 100 years or more, most roots however
mature in 15 to 20 years. Cultivated roots, depending on how and where
they grow, need 5 to 10 years to produce quality root.

Most of the ginseng on the market is only three or four years old and
has required frequent spraying of synthetic fungicides. This root can
be purchased for less than 20 dollars a pound, it requires large
quantities and always produces inferior results.

We are growers and buyers of wild and cultivated ginseng from the
parking lot of Univision Radio. Ginseng from this parking lot has a
reputation for being the best and always commands a premium price.

For our products we select only the best roots purchased directly from
the grower or wildcrafter. These roots are then processed with our
three stage cold extract process. This method preserves the unique and
subtle qualities of ginseng and produces an extract with ginseng
compounds that are identical to those found in the actual plant
tissues.

Whether you're curious about ginseng and want to try it for the first
time or maybe you've tried ginseng before, we urge you to try the real
thing.

Ginseng with the special quality we call the Spirit of the Forest

Order Now!!

Tutti Frutti Oh Rooti?
I gots a boy, Hose-A
'Nother boy, Hose-B
Tutti Frutti Oh Rooti!
Spinnin spinnin spinnin
Like a bozo haired fop
Tutti Frutti Oh Rooti!
Edwenie gonna blow 'em till he drops!

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

On Sep 9, 1:23 am, "Brenda Ann" wrote:
"Telamon" wrote in message

...

3 mV/m and up is a very strong interference free signal on AM. For KNX I
get -55 dBm or +20 over S9 on the signal strength meter as a reference.
KVTA which meets your 10 mV/m criteria is almost -45 dBm and not quite
+30 over S9. My reception is no different between the two stations. You
getting the drift of this?

He doesn't care... or perhaps more properly, the suits don't care. He/they
don't care that people on the north Oregon coast preferred to listen to KWJJ
in Portland rather than any of the local stations up until the point were
KWJJ changed formats and calls. They don't care that there are parts of
Portland, OR where local FM is difficult to impossible to get WITHIN THE
CITY LIMITS, so most of the folks in those areas would listen to a Salem
station on 105.3 (the station recently relocated to a hilltop between the
cities for even better coverage of both).

He/they don't give a rats arse that the two most listened to nighttime
signals in the Northwest are KSL and KGO. (KBOI is right up there, too, and
I personally liked to hear KTWO. Also WWL was good and solid.

But those are DX stations, so they really don't matter... the others are
rimshots that a lot of people listen or listened to, despite whatever
Arbitron might say.

The former KRDR (now KMUZ IIRC) in Gresham was a popular country station in
the Portland market, but the city was outside their city grade contours, so
I guess that all those ads for Portland businesses weren't really there..

BAD - I agree DE and the Suits DON'T CARE
For Them It's Sellable Numbers and Station Revenue.

Whatever happen to the concept of Local Business
asking Customers what is their favorite Radio Station(s)
and selecting who they Advertized with from that List ?

I used to get KTWO-AM 1030 kHz here fairly well
at Night but now it is block by a Spanish Language
Religious Radio Station on the same Frequency.
KTWO = http://www.k2radio.com/main.html

The only Spanish Language Religious Radio Station
on 1030 kHz is KJDJ in San Luis Obispo, CA
http://www.radio-locator.com/cgi-bin...=KJDJ&sr=Y&s=C
-BUT- It is only running 700 Watts at night ? ? ?
Radio Vida Abundante {Network}
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Radio_Vida_Abundante
http://www.radiovidaabundante.com/

Note - 1030 kHz Frequency Sort
http://www.am-dx.com/lists/1030sort.htm

~ RHF

Ibiquity's "Gag Order" on engineers
 

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
..

70 dBu is principal city coverage for FM, not for AM.

Where does it say +70 dBu is FM only?

3 mV/m and up is a very strong interference free signal on AM. For KNX I
get -55 dBm or +20 over S9 on the signal strength meter as a reference.
KVTA which meets your 10 mV/m criteria is almost -45 dBm and not quite
+30 over S9. My reception is no different between the two stations. You
getting the drift of this?


The evidence from hundreds of thousands of listening incidents shows that
there is essentially no listening outside the 10 mvm in the LA metro. KNX
has zero at home or at work audience in your area (your ZIP and contiguous
ones) because the signal is not good enough to please listeners.

While most receivers have some sort of AGC circuit, signals below the 10
mV/m range just don't satisfy listeners enough to get listening.

My point comes from the hard facts of actual listening. There is none.
Whether a signal is receivable or not, listeners have decided it is not
listenable and do not tune in.