[BC] Shunt Feed AM Antennas

[Robert Meuser]

Scott:

Your problem could be solved quite easily and it would help others solve 
different problems as well.  If  the commission could be persuaded to 
drop the minimum efficiency requirement, your problems would be solved. 
The rule no longer makes much sense any more.  When power was set in 
specific steps and the maximum regulated by class, a minimum efficiency 
antenna made sense and kept analysis simple. Since most station can use 
any amount of power that fits, only 50 KW stations and 1 KW class C 
stations need to worry about antenna efficiency any more. If you wanted 
to use a short tower with a shortened ground system, all you would have 
to do is apply the appropriate power and do a proof. You could feed a 
cell tower as a unipole.



Bailey, Scott wrote:

>Oh I should have said "Slant Wire Antenna". It's a shame the FCC would allow them.  It would save the small AM operator money.  A small AM can co-locate on a cell tower of the right height. I'd rather pay a reasonable rent than the outragious taxes that Sumner County Tennessee is tax us on towers.
> 
>Scott
>
>________________________________
>
>From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net on behalf of PeterH5322
>Sent: Sat 2/24/2007 2:31 AM
>To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
>Subject: Re: [BC] Shunt Feed AM Antennas
>
>
>
>
>  
>
>>Since the FCC isn't allowing new daytime stations it doesn't seem
>>likely that anyone would want to jump through the hurdles that the FCC
>>would impose to a slant feed.
>>    
>>
>
>KOAC is one of the few remaining slant-wire fed DAs, and it is perhaps
>unique as its day pattern is a mirror image of its night pattern.
>
>It is an ex-Class III-A, and has been on-air from near day-one, and for
>decades it was the only full-time 5 kW station on 550 in the West.
>
>Even the likes of former KOY is still 5/1.
>
>
>
>  
>