"Gary Schnabl" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
There are very few good, competitive AM signals in the US that are not
already utilized in a good manner and quite profitable. In fact, most
markets have only a couple of full market AM signals (DC has none, for
example) and these are uniformly committed to a profitable format.

What is left is the mid to lower tier of staitons, many of which are more
profitable in ethnic or religious programming than they could be, given
the
signal-to-ratings expectations as a competitive talker.

AA doesn't appear to fit in, and its revenue producing and
prior accounts payable history also speak for themselves.

They had one bad two-month period at start up. they changed management
and
got a more solid backer than the guys from Guam. They are on a firm
foundation now.

Let's take Limbaugh, for example, when he started 17 years ago. He had 58
outlets to begin with in an uncharted sea of AM stations with an unproven
format - and daytime at that.

Limbaugh started out on one station, KFBK in Sacramento. At that point, he
developed and went into business with his then-partner to form EIB and do
barter syndication. This was not new, with both talk and barter going back
to Bill Ballance (early 70's out of KGBS-LA) and Joe Pyne at KABC and
others.

Daytime, of course, has been radio's prime time since the early 50's. Trying
to do Limbaugh at night would have been a challenge!

AA still has fewer outlets than Limbaugh
started with.

You can not have fewer than 1. EIB started with zero, and built out of that.

When you consider the added alternative distractions that
didn't exist 17 years ago, he's still doing very well.

He is very entertaining. So is Paul Harvey, and he is still the most
listened toperson on rado.

And it's also not all due to Limbaugh. When he's away, the ratings for
that
program still hold up for his replacement hosts. While he was away for
some
time due to his problem(s), the listeners were still there, I've heard.
Maybe you have the ratings for those weeks. If so, make mention of them.

Ratings are not done by week or month. They are quarterly.

A sidebar - Does it really matter who's at the helm for the particular AA
shows for a particular time slot? Would it matter if the ex-mayor of Cincy
did Franken's show or vice versa, for example?

Probably. Talk radio is about talent and entertainment, not content.

However, the real question is how well would AA do in the solid red areas
of
the nation that do not have an occasional oasis of blue, such as the
Research Triangle in North Carolina or Austin TX? The conservative
programs
draw well in the traditionally blue areas that are also good radio
markets.
Why doesn't AA have an actual edge in their "own" backyards?

First, it is too new. Second, it is on mostly horrible signals. In places
like Portland (where it is on Oregon's best signal) it does great.

"Gary Schnabl" wrote in message
...

"David" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 4 May 2005 17:49:55 -0400, "Gary Schnabl"
wrote:

The
power brokers in many markets in the radio biz apparnetly don't care to
jump
onto AA, even though there are abundant facilities available for the
right
formatting fit. AA doesn't appear to fit in, and its revenue producing
and
prior accounts payable history also speak for themselves.

Near half the Air America affiliates are owned by Clear Channel.

Nobody brokers more power than they do.

The financial worth of the super conglomerates is not what was once
imagined, and many stations are now on the chopping block at Viacom.

Viacom decided it was not worth the effort to be in markets outside the top
20. this is because about 40% of all radio revenue is in the first 20
markets, so the big money is made there. It takes as much time to supervise
a station in Palm springs as one in LA. But the payoff is about 30 or 40
times higher in LA:

It
costs CC next to nothing to provide AA's programming, and a little of
something is better than a lot of nothing.

AA provides AA's programming. Clear Channel puts it on stations. It costs
money to run them... the LA affiliate must cost $100 thousand a month or
more to run.

Gary Schnabl wrote:

A sidebar - Does it really matter who's at the helm for the particular AA
shows for a particular time slot? Would it matter if the ex-mayor of Cincy
did Franken's show or vice versa, for example?


Springer did prostitutes, not other people's shows.

--
Former professional electron wrangler.

Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
AA still has fewer outlets than Limbaugh
started with.

You can not have fewer than 1. EIB started with zero, and built out of
that.

When Limbaugh went national, he started with 58 stations, and WTDY in south
central WI where I lived was one of them. So I listened the first day and
was surprised how popular he instantly became in the People's Republic of
Madison.


When you consider the added alternative distractions that
didn't exist 17 years ago, he's still doing very well.

He is very entertaining. So is Paul Harvey, and he is still the most
listened toperson on rado.

And it's also not all due to Limbaugh. When he's away, the ratings for
that
program still hold up for his replacement hosts. While he was away for
some
time due to his problem(s), the listeners were still there, I've heard.
Maybe you have the ratings for those weeks. If so, make mention of them.

Ratings are not done by week or month. They are quarterly.

I'm sure that some ratings were done in order to ascertain if any listener
erosion occurred during the fairly long time that Rush was away. Ratings
don't always have to come from Arbitron.

However, the real question is how well would AA do in the solid red
areas
of
the nation that do not have an occasional oasis of blue, such as the
Research Triangle in North Carolina or Austin TX? The conservative
programs
draw well in the traditionally blue areas that are also good radio
markets.
Why doesn't AA have an actual edge in their "own" backyards?

First, it is too new. Second, it is on mostly horrible signals. In places
like Portland (where it is on Oregon's best signal) it does great.

It sounds like you're making excuses why AA isn't doing as well as hoped.
Besides, The left coast is strongly blue, relatively. Conservative talk does
well nearly everywhere, even in strongly blue country. Otherwise they
wouldn't command all those hundreds of outlets. Delayed rebroadcasts of Art
Bell and Noury probably outdo AA.

DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...
DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".
.
and that's my opinion ~ RHF

Who knows? Maybe AA will take a page from NPR's book and start begging for
money...

"Gary Schnabl" wrote in message
...

"RHF" wrote in message
ups.com...
DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".
.
and that's my opinion ~ RHF

Who knows? Maybe AA will take a page from NPR's book and start begging for
money...

Why? By most reports, they are profitable already.

GS & DE,

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
om...
Who knows? Maybe AA will take a page from NPR's book and start begging
for
money...

Why? By most reports, they are profitable already.

Relax, David. It's a joke! Don't you just love fund drives?

In article ,
Gary Schnabl wrote:

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
m...
AA still has fewer outlets than Limbaugh
started with.

You can not have fewer than 1. EIB started with zero, and built out of
that.

When Limbaugh went national, he started with 58 stations, and WTDY in south
central WI where I lived was one of them. So I listened the first day and
was surprised how popular he instantly became in the People's Republic of
Madison.


When you consider the added alternative distractions that
didn't exist 17 years ago, he's still doing very well.

He is very entertaining. So is Paul Harvey, and he is still the most
listened toperson on rado.

And it's also not all due to Limbaugh. When he's away, the ratings for
that
program still hold up for his replacement hosts. While he was away for
some
time due to his problem(s), the listeners were still there, I've heard.
Maybe you have the ratings for those weeks. If so, make mention of them.

Ratings are not done by week or month. They are quarterly.

I'm sure that some ratings were done in order to ascertain if any listener
erosion occurred during the fairly long time that Rush was away. Ratings
don't always have to come from Arbitron.

However, the real question is how well would AA do in the solid red
areas
of
the nation that do not have an occasional oasis of blue, such as the
Research Triangle in North Carolina or Austin TX? The conservative
programs
draw well in the traditionally blue areas that are also good radio
markets.
Why doesn't AA have an actual edge in their "own" backyards?

First, it is too new. Second, it is on mostly horrible signals. In places
like Portland (where it is on Oregon's best signal) it does great.

It sounds like you're making excuses why AA isn't doing as well as hoped.
Besides, The left coast is strongly blue, relatively. Conservative talk does
well nearly everywhere, even in strongly blue country. Otherwise they
wouldn't command all those hundreds of outlets. Delayed rebroadcasts of Art
Bell and Noury probably outdo AA.




The red/blue thing is a fiction. The "most red" states" (UT and NV I
think) voted 1/3 for Kerry. Given that a popular radio show gets a
couple percent of the population to listen the pool is plenty big
enough for all flavors of opinion, even is a "red" state.

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

In article ,
Gary Schnabl wrote:

"RHF" wrote in message
oups.com...
DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".
.
and that's my opinion ~ RHF

Who knows? Maybe AA will take a page from NPR's book and start begging for
money...




This week Franken said, on air, that they expected to start turning a
profit latter this year.

They're doing fine.

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:39:00 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


Actually, less than 20% of the AA affiliates are owned by Clear Channel.



Isn't it 22/56? To be 47 by the year's end?

I only see 10 to 12 CCU stations on the list.



''Clear Channel adopts liberal programming on growing number of
stations
February 17, 2005, 2:49 PM


DETROIT (AP) -- The day before President Bush's inauguration,
listeners tuning in to the Detroit sports station WXDX-AM were
suddenly greeted by the sound of braying donkeys. By the time Bush was
taking the oath of office, the radio station had new call letters and
a full schedule of liberal talk shows.

WXDX-AM -- now known as WDTW-AM -- is one of 22 stations owned by
Clear Channel Communications Inc. that have switched to a liberal talk
format in the last year. This month, KTLK-AM in Los Angeles became the
latest Clear Channel station to adopt the format.''


http://www.freep.com/news/statewire/...1_20050217.htm

"David" wrote in message
...
On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:39:00 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


Actually, less than 20% of the AA affiliates are owned by Clear Channel.



Isn't it 22/56? To be 47 by the year's end?

I only see 10 to 12 CCU stations on the list.



''Clear Channel adopts liberal programming on growing number of
stations
February 17, 2005, 2:49 PM


DETROIT (AP) -- The day before President Bush's inauguration,
listeners tuning in to the Detroit sports station WXDX-AM were
suddenly greeted by the sound of braying donkeys. By the time Bush was
taking the oath of office, the radio station had new call letters and
a full schedule of liberal talk shows.

WXDX-AM -- now known as WDTW-AM -- is one of 22 stations owned by
Clear Channel Communications Inc. that have switched to a liberal talk
format in the last year. This month, KTLK-AM in Los Angeles became the
latest Clear Channel station to adopt the format.''

Check the list on the Website. the news article could, perhaps, be referring
to the number of stations that had switched recently under any ownership,
not necessarily CCU. Or, I counted wrong. In any case, they are just
affiliates.

On Thu, 05 May 2005 15:39:57 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 05 May 2005 14:39:00 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


Actually, less than 20% of the AA affiliates are owned by Clear Channel.



Isn't it 22/56? To be 47 by the year's end?

I only see 10 to 12 CCU stations on the list.



''Clear Channel adopts liberal programming on growing number of
stations
February 17, 2005, 2:49 PM


DETROIT (AP) -- The day before President Bush's inauguration,
listeners tuning in to the Detroit sports station WXDX-AM were
suddenly greeted by the sound of braying donkeys. By the time Bush was
taking the oath of office, the radio station had new call letters and
a full schedule of liberal talk shows.

WXDX-AM -- now known as WDTW-AM -- is one of 22 stations owned by
Clear Channel Communications Inc. that have switched to a liberal talk
format in the last year. This month, KTLK-AM in Los Angeles became the
latest Clear Channel station to adopt the format.''

Check the list on the Website. the news article could, perhaps, be referring
to the number of stations that had switched recently under any ownership,
not necessarily CCU. Or, I counted wrong. In any case, they are just
affiliates.


Los Angeles, Portland OR, Santa Barbara, San Diego, SF, Cinci,
Columbus, Denver, Detroit, Madison, Ashville NC, Boston (2 sticks),
Charleston SC, Miami, New Haven, West Palm, Washington DC.

I probably missed a couple.

CCU:

Clear Channel
Capstar
Citicasters
AM/FM
Jacor

David Eduardo wrote:
"Gary Schnabl" wrote in message
...

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...
*In anticipation of a format switch under owner Newsweb Corp.,
WAIT-AM
(850)
changes call letters today to WCPT (for "Chicago's Progressive
Talk").
Picking up WAIT's call letters is Newsweb's WSCN-AM (820).
As tipped here in February, expect an announcement any day that
the
suburban
daytime station will become a showcase for the liberal voices of
Air
America
Radio's Al Franken, Jerry Springer and Randi Rhodes along with
Jones
Radio
Networks' Ed Schultz. "

I used to pick up WAIT in the early 1970s when I lived in
Reeseville WI
near
Waterloo. Weren't they originally the station on 820? They had a
fairly
decent signal back then.

820 is 820. 850 is 850. Just the call letters have moved around. 850
is a
horrible signal.

With OK reception in DT Chicago, even on a walkman. Should be OK in
WISC.

JG

In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
content is on one of two clear channel stations
in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
less reach than WCKY.

550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at the
same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

Snip

What is the basis of this power/frequency rule?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
content is on one of two clear channel stations
in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
less reach than WCKY.

550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at
the
same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

Snip

What is the basis of this power/frequency rule?

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
content is on one of two clear channel stations
in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
less reach than WCKY.

550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at
the
same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

Snip

What is the basis of this power/frequency rule?


Brain fade.. I accidentally posted this response in the wrong thread (then
inadvertantly clicked too many times and sent a blank answer here)

I can't vouch for the exact math, but it has to do with ground conductivy
and I squared R losses versus frequency. Lower frequencies have better
ground conductivity (hence ground wave) than higher ones. Much more of the
signal is sky wave at the high end of the dial. Many 50KW stations on the
high end of the dial don't even cover their service areas at night (When I
lived in west Portland, OR, in the 70's, I used to get nearly as much signal
on 1520 from KOMA in OKC as I did from (what was then KYXI) on the same
frequency a few miles away in Clackamas.

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
...

| "Michael Lawson" wrote in message
| news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
| test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
| content is on one of two clear channel stations
| in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
| and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
| WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
| less reach than WCKY.

| 550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
| than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at the
| same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
| coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

David - I take exception to this assertion. Sure, low-end ground wave is
better...MUCH better...than the high end, but it's more like a factor of 5,
maybe 10...not 50. In fact, referenencing the FCC graphs available as PDFs, the
560kHz graph shows that, for the 20mmhos conductivity curve, for example, the
curve intersects 10mV/m at 9.6km, whereas for the 1550kHz graph, this point is
at 7.6km....hardly even a factor of 2, and when squared (for coverage area) only
a factor of 1.5 or so. So, sure, a 1kW station may have decent coverage at
550kHz of perhaps 1000 sq.km, but a 50kW operation at 1600 kHz is still going to
have much, much more.
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by
evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." -- Justice
Brandeis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...

| "Telamon" wrote in message
|
...
| In article ,
| "David Eduardo" wrote:

| "Michael Lawson" wrote in message
| news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
| test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
| content is on one of two clear channel stations
| in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
| and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
| WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
| less reach than WCKY.

| 550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
| than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at
| the same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
| coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

| Brain fade.. I accidentally posted this response in the wrong thread (then
| inadvertantly clicked too many times and sent a blank answer here)

| I can't vouch for the exact math, but it has to do with ground conductivy
| and I squared R losses versus frequency. Lower frequencies have better
| ground conductivity (hence ground wave) than higher ones. Much more of the
| signal is sky wave at the high end of the dial. Many 50KW stations on the
| high end of the dial don't even cover their service areas at night (When I
| lived in west Portland, OR, in the 70's, I used to get nearly as much signal
| on 1520 from KOMA in OKC as I did from (what was then KYXI) on the same
| frequency a few miles away in Clackamas.

This is the authoritative source: http://www.fcc.gov/mb/audio/73184/index.html
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by
evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." -- Justice
Brandeis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

In article ,
"Brenda Ann" wrote:

"Telamon" wrote in message
..
.
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
content is on one of two clear channel stations
in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
less reach than WCKY.

550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at
the
same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

Snip

What is the basis of this power/frequency rule?


Brain fade.. I accidentally posted this response in the wrong thread (then
inadvertantly clicked too many times and sent a blank answer here)

I can't vouch for the exact math, but it has to do with ground conductivy
and I squared R losses versus frequency. Lower frequencies have better
ground conductivity (hence ground wave) than higher ones. Much more of the
signal is sky wave at the high end of the dial. Many 50KW stations on the
high end of the dial don't even cover their service areas at night (When I
lived in west Portland, OR, in the 70's, I used to get nearly as much signal
on 1520 from KOMA in OKC as I did from (what was then KYXI) on the same
frequency a few miles away in Clackamas.

I would never have expected that large a difference in a loss result for
a vertically polarized signal except at the transmitter antenna. At the
transmitter antenna I would expect that the ground radial systems
employed would reduce the differences there between 500 KHz and 1500 KHz.

--
Telamon
Ventura, California

"Telamon" wrote in message
...
In article ,
"David Eduardo" wrote:

"Michael Lawson" wrote in message
news:16b7f$427a2948$d8c4c9e6 That big
test is happening now in Cincy, where some of AA's
content is on one of two clear channel stations
in the area (WCKY). For comparision, Rush, Savage
and the gang are not on the other clear channel station,
WLW, but are on 550 WKRC, which has significantly
less reach than WCKY.

550 has better daytime coverage and overall coverage of the local market
than 1530. As a rule of thumb, 1 kw on 540 is equal to 50 kw on 1600 at
the
same location, so 550 and 1530 are going to get about equal local
coverage... with 550 winning in some areas.

Snip

What is the basis of this power/frequency rule?

The difference in ground conductivity at different frequencies. On the AM
band, all else being equal, a lower frequency will cover much more than a
high one.

"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message
news:LIBee.16270$c86.2254@trndny09...


David - I take exception to this assertion. Sure, low-end ground wave is
better...MUCH better...than the high end, but it's more like a factor of
5,
maybe 10...not 50. In fact, referenencing the FCC graphs available as
PDFs, the
560kHz graph shows that, for the 20mmhos conductivity curve, for example,
the
curve intersects 10mV/m at 9.6km, whereas for the 1550kHz graph, this
point is
at 7.6km....hardly even a factor of 2, and when squared (for coverage
area) only
a factor of 1.5 or so. So, sure, a 1kW station may have decent coverage
at
550kHz of perhaps 1000 sq.km, but a 50kW operation at 1600 kHz is still
going to
have much, much more.
--

I actually ran maps of a 5 kw below 600 and a 50 kw above 1500. Both located
in areas of the same conductivity, within a few miles of each other. The low
frequency station covers slightly less than the 50 kw right above 1500.

A good practical example is the 5 kw coverage of WMT and the 50 kw of KXEL,
a few miles apart in identical high conductivity areas in Iowa. one on 600.
The other on 1540. A run on the coverage of each reveals 600 with slightly
better coverage than 1540. Or, take the 550 real coverage of KFYR in Bismark
or the daytime 5 KW of KNAX in Yankton, and compare with WHO on 1040. Both
cover greater areas for comparable signal levels. In fact, KWMT, a 5 kw on
540 in Ft. Dodge, IA, used to advertise in the 50's as having the largest
land coverage area in the USA, and the ads were certified by one of the
major consulting engineering firms of the day.

On Fri, 06 May 2005 04:12:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

Bigger waves contain more energy.

"David" wrote in message
...
On Fri, 06 May 2005 04:12:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

Bigger waves contain more energy.


That is pretty funny.

"Bob Haberkost" wrote in message
news:LIBee.16270$c86.2254@trndny09...

David - I take exception to this assertion. Sure, low-end ground wave is
better...MUCH better...than the high end, but it's more like a factor of
5,
maybe 10...not 50. In fact, referenencing the FCC graphs available as
PDFs, the
560kHz graph shows that, for the 20mmhos conductivity curve, for example,
the
curve intersects 10mV/m at 9.6km, whereas for the 1550kHz graph, this
point is
at 7.6km....hardly even a factor of 2, and when squared (for coverage
area) only
a factor of 1.5 or so. So, sure, a 1kW station may have decent coverage
at
550kHz of perhaps 1000 sq.km, but a 50kW operation at 1600 kHz is still
going to
have much, much more.
--

I did a little more research on this, and the key issue is, of course,
conductivity. I am guilty of using the old adage of 1 kw at the bottom is
equal to 50 kw at the top... which is true on average conductivity paths to
a great extent.

In fact, I've seen different numbers like 50kw at 1600 would equal 280w at
540. I had some sites run in CommStudy and found it depends largely on
ground conductivity and what contour you want to reach.
We used a theoretical site at sea where all signals propagate over 5,000 ms
and a site in Newfoundland in Canada where it was 1ms.

At sea, it took 1,010 watts of 1600 to equal 1000 of 540 if one wanted to
get to the 25mv contour. It took 1,070 to match the 5mvs, and 2,100 watts to
match the 0.5s.

On nasty land, it took 21kw to match the 25 and 5mv contours (they weren't
the same but just eyeballing them, they were a 99% fit. It took 42+ kw to
get them to match at 0.5mv.

So, while milage may vary, the fact is that there can be as much as a 40;1
ratio on contour coverage just in these examples.

On Fri, 06 May 2005 15:38:41 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:


"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 06 May 2005 04:12:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

Bigger waves contain more energy.


That is pretty funny.


Relationship between wavelength and idstance to the ionosphere?
Wavefront coherence?

"David Eduardo" wrote in message
m...
I did a little more research on this, and the key issue is, of course,
conductivity. I am guilty of using the old adage of 1 kw at the bottom is
equal to 50 kw at the top... which is true on average conductivity paths
to
a great extent.


Another way of explaining the frequency dependence is to consider the
phenomenon of skin effect in conductors. The higher frequencies do not
penetrate a conductor (or the earth in the case of an AM band ground wave)
as deeply as do the lower frequencies. Try to visualize the signal being
conducted via a narrow conductor vs. a thicker one, which is essentially the
case.

"David" wrote in message
...
| On Fri, 06 May 2005 15:38:41 GMT, "David Eduardo"
| wrote:
|
|
| "David" wrote in message
| .. .
| On Fri, 06 May 2005 04:12:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
| wrote:

| Bigger waves contain more energy.

| That is pretty funny.

| Relationship between wavelength and idstance to the ionosphere?
| Wavefront coherence?

No, it's all related to conductivity, as David Eduardo suggests. The graphs
show that the 5000mmho sea-water conductivity is very nearly the same as the
ideal inverse-km line, but slightly more divergent at the higher frequency. The
less conductivity, per the graph, the more distinctly superior a watt at 540 is
over the same power at 1600. As conductivity is a resistance measurement, the
issue is that a path with less conductivity results in more losses in the
radiated wave, attenuating it more at the higher frequencies. The greater
attenuation, however, probably relates to the laws of physics in the same way as
electromagnetis spectra work at the higher frequencies....at high UHF, for
example, it's the size of the molecules in the air that attentuate the higher
frequencies more than the lower. At MW frequencies, this effect is exacted by
the size of the earth (which also is the reason why groundwaves go
over-the-horizon, as it's the earth which diffracts the wavefront).
--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Men born to freedom are naturally alert to repel invasion of their liberty by
evil-minded rulers. The greatest dangers to liberty lurk in insidious
encroachment by men of zeal, well-meaning but without understanding." -- Justice
Brandeis
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
For direct replies, take out the contents between the hyphens. -Really!-

In article ,
David Eduardo wrote:

"David" wrote in message
.. .
On Fri, 06 May 2005 04:12:20 GMT, "David Eduardo"
wrote:

Bigger waves contain more energy.


That is pretty funny.




Surf's up!

--
a d y k e s @ p a n i x . c o m

Don't blame me. I voted for Gore.

the daytime 5 KW of KNAX in Yankton

I'm presuming you mean WNAX.

"Sid Schweiger" wrote in message
...
the daytime 5 KW of KNAX in Yankton

I'm presuming you mean WNAX.

Yep. I always do that. KNAX is in Fresno or somewhere like that.

WNAX. Home of Big Aggie (the mascot was a very large slightly Swedish
looking gal riding a tractor over the prairie.)

On Thu, 05 May 2005 13:18:18 GMT, David wrote:

On 4 May 2005 21:17:13 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".
.
and that's my opinion ~ RHF
. . . . .

NPR's national news programming is meticulously even-handed (they are
under a great deal of scrutiny) to the point where the Lefties think
they are too Right Wing and the Righties think they are too Left Wing.

Any time the news is covered accurately and in depth someone with an
ideological bent will scream ''bias''.

If the news doesn't offend you, it ain't doing its job.

Then Rush and his co-freaks (and co-dependents) are doing a
fabulous job.

On Wed, 11 May 2005 06:46:01 GMT, wrote:

On Thu, 05 May 2005 13:18:18 GMT, David wrote:

On 4 May 2005 21:17:13 -0700, "RHF"
wrote:

DE & GS,

AA's biggest foe for a slice of the "Talk Radio" Pie
is not Rush Limbaugh, it is 1200+ 'local' NPR Stations
and their "Soft Message" {Enlightened} Liberal Programming.
NPR has a Long Term Listenership {Generational} that goes
back for many more years then Rush Limbaugh has been on
the Air with his "Stick".
.
and that's my opinion ~ RHF
. . . . .

NPR's national news programming is meticulously even-handed (they are
under a great deal of scrutiny) to the point where the Lefties think
they are too Right Wing and the Righties think they are too Left Wing.

Any time the news is covered accurately and in depth someone with an
ideological bent will scream ''bias''.

If the news doesn't offend you, it ain't doing its job.

Then Rush and his co-freaks (and co-dependents) are doing a
fabulous job.
That's not the news.