[BC] Why an older transmitter may be a good choice

[Paul B. Walker, Jr.]

When I get a solid state in here eventually, I plan on keeping the RCA BTA1M
in here as a back up!

-- 
Paul B. Walker, Jr.
Operations Manager/Program Director
WABV-AM 1590 Abbeville, SC (Where we just in a BRAND NEW Solid State Padlock
and Chain around the tower fence!)
www.walkerbroadcasting.com


On 2/21/07, Bailey, Scott <sbailey at nespower.com> wrote:
>
>
>
> Robert,
>   This may be a stupid statement to make, but small stations should not
> worry about maintaining a tube TX for a backup. As you have pointed out,
> one must still perform routine maintenance on these tube boxes to insure
> that if there is a major problem with the main solid state box, the tube
> rig will be there to take on the load. The high cost of tubes, reactors,
> mod transformers, and just older designs are just not cost effective to
> maintain as an aux.
>   I feel with Solid State rigs as stable as they are today, there is no
> need for a tube box at a small stand alone AM or FM. If an AM stand
> alone like mine feels compelled to have a back up, buy the little 250
> watt Energy Onix box, but really, I feel that's not necessary.
>
> Scott
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
> [mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Robert Meuser
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 2:18 PM
> To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [BC] Why an older transmitter may be a good choice
>
> That really  depends on a number of things. Tube rigs do not like
> sitting idle, they must be exercised on a regular basis and kept clean
> just as if the are a main. The exercising itself could be a gotcha since
>
> that probably subjects the TX to a lot more on off cycling unless the
> station is a hard day only operation. With tubes being more and more
> difficult to find, I would think a step start on the filaments would be
> a good addition. I think the practical question is how many small
> stations can afford to spoon feed a tube aux so that it will be reliable
>
> when needed that can not afford two solid state TXs?  This would be
> especially true if the station had a history of good financial
> management. In that case somewhere in the 80s or 90s a SS TX was
> purchased. At that time the tube TX was retained as the aux. After a ten
>
> year depreciation another SS TX was purchased and the original retained
> as backup.  If the station was really old meaning it might possibly have
>
> a large TX building, the tube TX could be retained as an off line
> ultimate disaster recovery unit.  There are some class A stations that
> operate this way with two or more on line 50 KW TXs one tube TX of 10 or
>
> 50 KW normally disconnected from everything awaiting the ultimate
> disaster.
>
> R
>