[BC] Antenna Zoning /was/ Slant wire feeds vs series fed

[Warren Mead]

We put in a  freestanding fibreglass 94 foot top loaded Valcom a few 
months ago and it works very well.  But I would recomend using a crane 
to erect it rather than
the rope and pulley scheme that Valcom shows.
This is for a 400 watt station on 1611.  The swampy block of land we 
purchased is in the heart of town,  and  quite small.  The  75 radials 
are short at between 15 and 20 metres and each  wire is terminated with 
a 5 foot ground rod.  Daytime,  in our best direction the signal 
disapears on a sensitive car radio about 70 kilometres out.  We 
previously had a 140 foot tower, on poor ground,  further out of town 
which didn't do as well.
The Valcom  (and the 9200) has been a worthwhile investment for us.


Warren Mead



Phil Alexander wrote:

>On 30 Jan 2006 at 23:56, Scott Bailey wrote:
>
>  
>
>>    I'm happy to see alternative solutions are being used in place of 
>>the ole standard base insulated, series fed tower. As our population 
>>grows, new subdivisions are being built, yes, we are being forced to 
>>come up with alternative solutions for AM.  This will help keep lots 
>>of low power, non-d's going dark. I'm happy the commission has 
>>allowed the Kinstar and the Valcom.
>>    
>>
>
>
>IMHO the Valcom and Kinstar antennas offer good solutions to the 
>local zoning problem without a significant penalty in coverage. 
>I'm curious about what practical way a Kinstar might be prohibited 
>in any area where aerial utility plant has been permitted. If it is 
>a problem, would it not be possible to have the utility put up the 
>poles with a deal to lease them back for a nominal fee? A Kinstar 
>is nothing more than a 3 to 5 acre pasture with 5 utility poles 
>planted in it. 
>
>While the Valcom may look a bit strange, that seems more the result 
>of the white color and taper. IMHO, if it were gray and less tapered, 
>it would make a great flag pole - - an who is going to deny your right 
>to fly the flag. It works for cell towers, why not for broadcasting? <g>  
>Now, if only they made it below 900 kHz. :-(
>
>
>Phil Alexander, CSRE, AMD
>Broadcast Engineering Services and Technology 
>(a Div. of Advanced Parts Corporation) 
>Ph. (317) 335-2065   FAX (317) 335-9037
>
>
>
>
>
>  
>