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.