Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#4
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Telamon" wrote in message ... In article , "David Eduardo" wrote: Snip In many markets, 10 kw is not enough to cover the market without being trashed by manmade noise. Also, the relationship has to considder that low band AMs cover much better than high band... a 5 kw on 550 outcovers vastly a 50 kw on 1500. Snip You are referring to daytime reception only? Yes. In the US, there are so few stations that have any extended night coverage as to make the point moot for all but maybe 30 or 40 stations in the whole nation that can get usable skywave coverage. In any event, night AM listening is so low that it is irrelevanat, irrespective of coverage. Considering daytime ground wave propagation, is the difference in coverage low to high band due to ground conductivity where the high end of the band has more loss per mile? Given the same transmitter site, and same radiation efficiency, the difference is that medium wave signals propagate better watt for watt on the lower frequencies. Ground conductivity decreases as a function of frequency. This is why the old adage that 1 kw on 1540 covers better than 50 kw on 1600 is nearly true. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Forum | |||
BROADCASTDB Live Radio : Just Added | Broadcasting | |||
FS:SPEECH PROSCESSOR SP1-A BY CLEAR CHANNEL | Swap | |||
Denver Clear Channel drops Fox Sports for Liberal Talk | Shortwave | |||
Channel-based AM tube tuner (was Designs for a single frequency high performance AM-MW receiver?) | Shortwave | |||
Poor quality low + High TV channels? How much dB in Preamp? | Antenna |