"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"dave" wrote in message
m...
friend's ipod with commercials wrote:

Even 6,000 watts of Fm in stereo is scratchy..

Oooh; don't tell these guys:

http://www.fccinfo.com/CMDProEngine....DNumber=264236

HAAT of the antenna structure makes a lot more difference than EIRP.

True to some extent. I was involved with a station in the LA area that
had 500 watts at over 1000 feet, HAAT, and about 2000 feet over the LA
Basin. What we had was a bad signal over a very large area,

That sounds like multipath in the RF plumbing. Did you tune for minimum
Synchronous AM?

Every necessary step was taken... including a rebuild on Johnstone when the
station was purchased. This was simply a case of too little power, although
it theoretically covered a great distance. The power was just not enough
anywhere to penetrate homes and buildings.

"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news With
antenna heights approaching 2000' HAAT, the Portland, OR FM's put a
good stereo signal out to about 20 miles when running only their 10W
exciters (which has been done on a few occasions when mains power was
out over a wide area for an extended time).

And likely nobody was listening... that is too little power to generate
any audinece.

I doubt they lost any significant number of listeners in the metro area,
since all stations at that point were on an equal playing field, and
already had their audiences. I know that at my place on the far east end
of the county I noticed absolutely no difference in signal quality.


Laws of Physics step in here... the average home or at work listener's
receiver is not sensitive enough to pick up much under a 65 to near 70
dbu signal, so they weren't listening to anything.

Whatever, 'dwardo. I've used an exciter at 440' to cover about to a 15
mile radius in good stereo.

The case here is that listeners, in real environments, don't / can't tune in
signals much below about 64 to 65 dbu.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"dave" wrote in message
m...
friend's ipod with commercials wrote:

Even 6,000 watts of Fm in stereo is scratchy..

Oooh; don't tell these guys:

http://www.fccinfo.com/CMDProEngine....DNumber=264236


HAAT of the antenna structure makes a lot more difference than EIRP.

True to some extent. I was involved with a station in the LA area
that had 500 watts at over 1000 feet, HAAT, and about 2000 feet over
the LA Basin. What we had was a bad signal over a very large area,

That sounds like multipath in the RF plumbing. Did you tune for
minimum Synchronous AM?

Every necessary step was taken... including a rebuild on Johnstone when
the station was purchased. This was simply a case of too little power,
although it theoretically covered a great distance. The power was just
not enough anywhere to penetrate homes and buildings.

Where was the beam tilt aimed?

David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news With
antenna heights approaching 2000' HAAT, the Portland, OR FM's put
a good stereo signal out to about 20 miles when running only their
10W exciters (which has been done on a few occasions when mains
power was out over a wide area for an extended time).

And likely nobody was listening... that is too little power to
generate any audinece.

I doubt they lost any significant number of listeners in the metro
area, since all stations at that point were on an equal playing
field, and already had their audiences. I know that at my place on
the far east end of the county I noticed absolutely no difference in
signal quality.


Laws of Physics step in here... the average home or at work
listener's receiver is not sensitive enough to pick up much under a
65 to near 70 dbu signal, so they weren't listening to anything.

Whatever, 'dwardo. I've used an exciter at 440' to cover about to a
15 mile radius in good stereo.

The case here is that listeners, in real environments, don't / can't
tune in signals much below about 64 to 65 dbu.

Your consumerborg target demo is perhaps too stupid to work an FM
receiver but lots of normal people know about antennas and such.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news
With
antenna heights approaching 2000' HAAT, the Portland, OR FM's put a
good stereo signal out to about 20 miles when running only their 10W
exciters (which has been done on a few occasions when mains power was
out over a wide area for an extended time).

And likely nobody was listening... that is too little power to generate
any audinece.

I doubt they lost any significant number of listeners in the metro area,
since all stations at that point were on an equal playing field, and
already had their audiences. I know that at my place on the far east end
of the county I noticed absolutely no difference in signal quality.


Laws of Physics step in here... the average home or at work listener's
receiver is not sensitive enough to pick up much under a 65 to near 70 dbu
signal, so they weren't listening to anything.

I hate to tell you this, because you will simply deny it anyway... but here
in Korea, there are only a few full power stations, most of those in Seoul,
Deagu and Busan. The rest of the country is served by literally hundreds,
perhaps thousands, of 20-40 watt translators. Most of the translators can
be heard very easily in many towns/villes on cheap pocket radios and mp3
players that have FM radios in them. I can personally sit here in my house
(houses here are almost 100% made from concrete and steel rebar) and hear at
least 4 translators for EACH of the network stations (KBS, MBC, CBS, etc.),
with the closest of those being about 12 Km away in Pyeongtaek, and all of
this on a little Sony pocket radio. There are three AFN plants that can be
heard as well: the local one, 5 Km away at the back of our base, running 40
watts, one from Osan, about 15Km away, running 30 watts, and the "big" one
in Seoul, 80 Km away, running a whopping huge 1200 watts! I don't know what
sort of oddball signal black hole you have there, but in the rest of the
real world, low power does work. Also, I'm sure you know that there are
many places on the east coast where a 6KW plant is as big as it gets..

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"dave" wrote in message
m...
friend's ipod with commercials wrote:

Even 6,000 watts of Fm in stereo is scratchy..

Oooh; don't tell these guys:

http://www.fccinfo.com/CMDProEngine....DNumber=264236

HAAT of the antenna structure makes a lot more difference than EIRP.

True to some extent. I was involved with a station in the LA area that
had 500 watts at over 1000 feet, HAAT, and about 2000 feet over the LA
Basin. What we had was a bad signal over a very large area,

That sounds like multipath in the RF plumbing. Did you tune for minimum
Synchronous AM?

Every necessary step was taken... including a rebuild on Johnstone when
the station was purchased. This was simply a case of too little power,
although it theoretically covered a great distance. The power was just
not enough anywhere to penetrate homes and buildings.

Where was the beam tilt aimed?

At the populated areas, not the mountain, but this was a single bay, so it
really was only optimized to comply with downward radiation for OSHA
purposes. This was just too little power. Everything was designed right, and
over the course of a number of years, three different antennas, both side
and pole mount, were tried. It was so obvious that it was simply too little
power... so moving down to the valley floor produced the right results and
within one survey period saw a dramatic increase in listening.

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

I don't know what
sort of oddball signal black hole you have there, but in the rest of the
real world, low power does work.

No, it does not. In evaluations of the listening of several million Arbitron
diary keepers, where listening locations were identified by ZIP code, less
than 5% of the listening time was outside the 54 dbu contour. Most, 85% was
inside the 70 dbu. Interestingly, this matches the reception characteristics
of most consumer grade radios.

Your anecdotal evidence is amusing, but there is no data you provided that
shows that anyone even listens to these facilities at the distance you
mention. We all have such experiences... I got the exciter of one of my
transmitters in Ecuador (located about 3000 feet above Quito) nearly 200 km
away on a friend's hacienda; unfortunately, the fact that only the exciter
was on made for a long drive back to the city and up the hill.

Also, I'm sure you know that there are
many places on the east coast where a 6KW plant is as big as it gets..

That's not so. There are B's and A's in most of the NE, just as there are in
Southern California. Oh, and that is where an LA A duo is now sitting in the
top 5 18-49 and 25-54, but that's because there are 8 million people inside
the 64 dbu's of the two.

David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

I don't know what
sort of oddball signal black hole you have there, but in the rest of the
real world, low power does work.

No, it does not. In evaluations of the listening of several million Arbitron
diary keepers, where listening locations were identified by ZIP code, less
than 5% of the listening time was outside the 54 dbu contour. Most, 85% was
inside the 70 dbu. Interestingly, this matches the reception characteristics
of most consumer grade radios.

Your anecdotal evidence is amusing, but there is no data you provided that
shows that anyone even listens to these facilities at the distance you
mention. We all have such experiences... I got the exciter of one of my
transmitters in Ecuador (located about 3000 feet above Quito) nearly 200 km
away on a friend's hacienda; unfortunately, the fact that only the exciter
was on made for a long drive back to the city and up the hill.

You had no transmitters.

Brenda Ann wrote:
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...
"David Eduardo" wrote in message
news With
antenna heights approaching 2000' HAAT, the Portland, OR FM's put a
good stereo signal out to about 20 miles when running only their 10W
exciters (which has been done on a few occasions when mains power was
out over a wide area for an extended time).
And likely nobody was listening... that is too little power to generate
any audinece.
I doubt they lost any significant number of listeners in the metro area,
since all stations at that point were on an equal playing field, and
already had their audiences. I know that at my place on the far east end
of the county I noticed absolutely no difference in signal quality.

Laws of Physics step in here... the average home or at work listener's
receiver is not sensitive enough to pick up much under a 65 to near 70 dbu
signal, so they weren't listening to anything.

I hate to tell you this, because you will simply deny it anyway... but here
in Korea, there are only a few full power stations, most of those in Seoul,
Deagu and Busan. The rest of the country is served by literally hundreds,
perhaps thousands, of 20-40 watt translators. Most of the translators can
be heard very easily in many towns/villes on cheap pocket radios and mp3
players that have FM radios in them. I can personally sit here in my house
(houses here are almost 100% made from concrete and steel rebar) and hear at
least 4 translators for EACH of the network stations (KBS, MBC, CBS, etc.),
with the closest of those being about 12 Km away in Pyeongtaek, and all of
this on a little Sony pocket radio. There are three AFN plants that can be
heard as well: the local one, 5 Km away at the back of our base, running 40
watts, one from Osan, about 15Km away, running 30 watts, and the "big" one
in Seoul, 80 Km away, running a whopping huge 1200 watts! I don't know what
sort of oddball signal black hole you have there, but in the rest of the
real world, low power does work. Also, I'm sure you know that there are
many places on the east coast where a 6KW plant is as big as it gets..



That's Class B territory, and Southern California is part of it. We do
have a couple of grandfathered FM blowtorches, but all they do is heat
up the mountains and the ocean. 6 KW on a good mountain is plenty.

David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
m...
David Eduardo wrote:

"dave" wrote in message
...
David Eduardo wrote:

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

"dave" wrote in message
m...
friend's ipod with commercials wrote:

Even 6,000 watts of Fm in stereo is scratchy..

Oooh; don't tell these guys:

http://www.fccinfo.com/CMDProEngine....DNumber=264236


HAAT of the antenna structure makes a lot more difference than EIRP.

True to some extent. I was involved with a station in the LA area
that had 500 watts at over 1000 feet, HAAT, and about 2000 feet
over the LA Basin. What we had was a bad signal over a very large
area,

That sounds like multipath in the RF plumbing. Did you tune for
minimum Synchronous AM?

Every necessary step was taken... including a rebuild on Johnstone
when the station was purchased. This was simply a case of too little
power, although it theoretically covered a great distance. The power
was just not enough anywhere to penetrate homes and buildings.

Where was the beam tilt aimed?

At the populated areas, not the mountain, but this was a single bay, so
it really was only optimized to comply with downward radiation for OSHA
purposes. This was just too little power. Everything was designed right,
and over the course of a number of years, three different antennas, both
side and pole mount, were tried. It was so obvious that it was simply
too little power... so moving down to the valley floor produced the
right results and within one survey period saw a dramatic increase in
listening.

Single bays don't work. You put as much energy into the sky as anywhere
else with a single bay. A 3 bay, with null-fill, tilted to the beach,
low VSWR 1.06:1 or better at +/- 600 kHz, and a properly constructed
transmission line should work well.