[BC] KFI Tower replacement ?

[Robert Meuser]

Dan:

I don't see the  FCC considering ground conductivity for skywave protection.

Dan Strassberg wrote:
> Dave Hultsman wrote:
> The FCC might be an easier problem to resolve than the Santa Catalina
> Island authorities.  It is my understanding that the station had to replace
> the towers a few years back and they wanted to keep them off the island.
> 
> -----
> 
> 
> Naturally. Although I had never heard the story, I assumed as much, hence my
> use of the phrase "fat chance." That's why I wrote about using an existing
> KBRT tower without modification. My reference to constructing a conforming
> radiator on Catalina was simply to make the point that, because of the salt
> water for "26 miles across the sea," KFI's effective power on the mainland
> would be greater than the FCC curves predict from a 65.5-degree tower and
> would probably provide coverage greater than that achieved with KFI's
> licensed but no-longer extant 175-degree stick.
> 
> Both Peter Haas and Dana Puopolo have proposed using more than one of KBRT's
> three towers. Using only two of KBRT's towers, it would be a slam dunk to
> produce a cardioid pattern that would yield the same field intensity as
> KFI's licensed tower over a broad arc centered around an azimuth of 75
> degrees. I suspect, though, that if that were done, avoiding increased
> interference to co-channel stations at night (and maybe a first adjacent or
> two by day) might require a power reduction because I think the coverage
> from the island location would be surprisingly better than that from the
> licensed location.
> 
> --
> Dan Strassberg, dan.strassberg at att.net
> eFax 707-215-6367
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> This is the BROADCAST mailing list
> To send to the list, email: broadcast at radiolists.net
> For sub changes, archives and info on this other lists: http://www.radiolists.net/
>