Acceptable registrations in the queue through March 16 at 11:00a ET have now been activated. Enjoy! -M.W.

Terms of Use have been amended effective October 6, 2019. Make sure you are aware of the new rules! Please visit this thread for details: https://www.mibuzzboard.com/phpBB3/view ... 16&t=48619

WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

The technical side of broadcasting. Think IBOC is a sham? Talk about it here! How about HDTV? Post DX reports here as well.
User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Tue Apr 26, 2022 3:06 pm

It appears that it's proposed that WLLZ be 39 kW @ 169 meters HAAT, diplexed with the WDET antenna, and if licensed, WLLZ will no longer be a grandfathered superpower station at 61 kW @ 163 meters. The proposed 54 dBu contour appears to fit inside the licensed 54 dBu contour. If it were to continue to be grandfathered, the 60 dBu would be the reference contour under Section 73.211. It appears that the proposed 60 dBu would be close to being within the licensed 60 dBu, but since it is at the ERP and HAAT equivalent to Class B stations which are not grandfathered superpower under 73.211, it appears to be a moot point. I guess they could be more than 39 kW maximum to the South if they went to a directional antenna. If the structural changes mentioned to the present building are completed and do not preclude the existing facility, I guess they could just stay put. I guess they could have proposed the WDET tower in shorter order by applying for an STA at the WDET tower and antenna.

https://www.fccdata.org/?facid=&call=WL ... d=&lang=en


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

Marcus
Posts: 340
Joined: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:08 pm
Location: Sarnia, Ontario

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Marcus » Thu Apr 28, 2022 1:08 pm

Could this be a temporary move so that they can do some work on the existing transmitter site?



User avatar
MWmetalhead
Site Admin
Posts: 11871
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by MWmetalhead » Thu Apr 28, 2022 6:01 pm

I thought both WLLZ and WMXD are located atop Cadillac Tower in downtown Detroit?

Seems odd that only WLLZ would be moving. Does WMXD broadcast from atop the RenCen instead?



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Fri Apr 29, 2022 8:09 am

I'll check regularly on Michi Bradley's sites to see if WMXD files anything. WMXD is directional, so it has to be at a separate COR on the supporting structure to avoid interactions affecting the modeled antenna and pattern.

And this may be a similar situation to what other grandfathered superpower stations did, such as WRIF and and WSRW, where APPs went in but they ended up back at the ERP of the original facility.

https://www.fccdata.org/?lang=en&qmenu= ... n=-83.0449


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
Art Van Damme
Posts: 118
Joined: Mon Dec 06, 2004 1:55 pm
Location: Hamtramck

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Art Van Damme » Fri Apr 29, 2022 10:30 am

I’m guessing this application has nothing to do with power and everything to do with signal obstruction.

The ongoing construction of the supposed 54 story skyscraper (on the site of the former Hudson’s Department Store) would obstruct the 106.7 signal toward the northwest burbs. Multi path would be spectacular. 101.9 has a clear path.

92.3 would incur the same issue.

Is the Cadillac Tower even open or occupied?

Art



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Fri Apr 29, 2022 12:41 pm

Well, from the WDET tower for WMXD 92.3 would be short spaced to WBGV 92.5 even under old Section 73.213 rules, and difficult as a first adjacent to protect under 73.215, as under the old 3 kW rules, the contours were allowed to be overlapped 48 dBu to 54 dBu and 54 dBu to 60 dBu.

If the FCC would allow WBGV with 6 kW/100 meter HAAT Class A and WMXD with full facilities, to negotiate overlap with each other, it might give more flexibility for WMXD to go further North. This might also allow WBGV 92.5, WDZZ 92.7, and WJSZ 92.5 to all mutually agree to be 6 kW/100 meter HAAT nondirectional equivalent. If IHM and Audacy did some mutual back scratching, maybe they could negotiate the short spacing between WMXD 92.3 and WKRK 92.3. There's also WVKS 92.5, which short spacing was allowed under previous versions of Section 73.213. That would increase the distance to that also. It's not clear that all or this, but at least some would, be permitted under current 73.213 rules.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
MWmetalhead
Site Admin
Posts: 11871
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by MWmetalhead » Sun May 01, 2022 9:03 am

I wonder if WMXD will eventually wind up at the WNIC site? They are going to be short spaced just about anywhere they wind up; the biggest issue obviously being WVKS Toledo. Since WMXD and WVKS are co-owned, I suspect a waiver can be obtained.

The WNIC site is probably a no-go for WLLZ since it would be short-spaced to WQKL Ann Arbor by a good six or seven miles.

Relative to WMXD, a side mount to the WJLB structure in Highland Park, which is shorter than the WNIC tower, would probably be suboptimal. Perhaps WJLB and WMXD would be able to share a top-mounted antenna? Under such a scenario, WMXD would need to drop well below class maximum power so that they could use an omnidirectional signal, I assume. Perhaps I'm wrong regarding that assumption, though. I'd be curious to know how WDRQ, WDMK and WDKL all use the structure at 10 Mile and Greenfield given the fact two of the three stations at that site are directional with different patterns.



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Sun May 01, 2022 11:06 am

There are several ways over the years that have been used to have second and third adjacent stations in the same general area.

Early on, collocation of second and third adjacent stations was allowed.

Class As were allowed fairly close by with prior rules on second and third adjacent channels under rules before circa 1964, shown in the 1960 NAB Engineering Handbook. See worldradiohistory.com to find these rules. There are also the older Section 73.213 interference zones, allowed from about 1964 to the very early 1980s.

There's the Raleigh Waiver used on NCE-FM stations.

There are AM rule changes over the years that allowed 5 mV/m to 5 mV/m second channel groundwave overlap exclusion. If 70 dBu F(50,50) to 70 dBu F(50,50) overlap rules for second and third adjacent FM stations were used, you could reduce Class B to Class B separation to about 40 miles, A to B to about 30 miles, A to C1 about 41 miles.

Concentric interference circles (more or less) are used in international treaties, determining interference ratios, in addition to being used previously for Channel 6 protection from NCE-FM Band stations.

You have to be careful over large bodies of water like Lake Michigan, Lake Erie, and Lake Ontario, as first adjacents are often much stronger during tropospheric events, particularly in shoreline areas, where the interfering signal from across a Lake or Ocean Shoreline "Bay" areas may be much stronger than a nearby signal during such events. That may need to be addressed with more advanced signal prediction methods.

David Gleason is familiar with rules in Mexico, Central America, and South America that allow second adjacent and presumably third adjacent in the same general area. These rules were used to move the vast majority of AM stations to FM in Mexico and other countries.

The NAB and large broadcast groups frequently are opposed to this type of rule changes, because they mean more competing signals in their broadcast areas. Note that they are also the most enthusiastic about the changes, when they figure out how to use the rule changes to their advantage.

With radios from the last few decades, there are really few issues with second and third adjacent signals, and that needs to be considered as to impact on such short spaced stations. RITOIE and IF Beat Frequency issues are bigger problems, but those are less of a problem on newer radios also.
Last edited by Ben Zonia on Sun May 01, 2022 12:50 pm, edited 2 times in total.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Sun May 01, 2022 11:45 am

A to B and B to B first adjacent situations like WMXD 92.3 and WVKS 92.5 are more problematic. Years ago, they were in a short spaced interference zone, and I think they could both be 10 kW/150 meters nondirectional under those rules. They must have entered into an agreement for both to be essentially maximum facilities at some point.

WFBE 95.1 and WVIC-FM 94.9, etc. were in the 10 kW/500 feet zone, but WVIC was already 20 kW from 250 feet under pre 1964 rules, and later they agreed to WVIC at 50 kW/500 feet, and WFBE at 50 kW/240 feet, and with a later modified 73.215 to WKQI and an agreement with CKUE 95.1 Chatham, ON, could have been 50 kW/243 feet NONDIRECTIONAL from the old FCHS site. WFBE was only limited to 33 kW toward WKQI 95.5, as they were not allowed 50 kW under the original 73.215, but were allowed under a revised 73.215 making second adjacents the same as third adjacents. Of course, the FBE had just been forced to buy an expensive DA to protect WKQI, with 8 bays 1/2 wave spaced to limit downward radiation to the HS. If Ed Rauch hadn't passed away, and they hadn't to vacate FCHS, maybe they could have been 50 kW nondirectional from there. Now it's ridiculously directional, especially with the measured DAs, like WLAV-FM is. The actual measured DA patterns are found online in the License To Cover Application Exhibits.

WOIA 102.9, etc. and WBRB-FM 102.7, etc. were in the 10 kW/500 feet zone, but WBRB-FM, etc. was already 17 kW from 400 feet. Later, WOIA, etc. agreed to 50 kW DA with a null toward WBRB-FM, etc. and WBRB-FM, etc., was allowed 50 kW toward WOIA, etc., but still had to null WCPZ.

There have been so many call letter changes, I just put an old set instead, from sometime back when all this was going on. Maybe I should have used Facility ID numbers, but that would be even less clear.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
MWmetalhead
Site Admin
Posts: 11871
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by MWmetalhead » Sun May 01, 2022 11:48 pm

WOAI = today's WWWW-FM
WBRB = today's WDKL-FM

All the rest of the call signs are still in use. :)



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Mon May 02, 2022 9:09 am

WDRQ, WDMK and WDKL are at different Centers Of Radiation AGL, so they don't interact like a DA and a Nondirectional Antenna at the same height AGL would.
MWmetalhead wrote:
Sun May 01, 2022 11:48 pm
WOAI = today's WWWW-FM
WBRB = today's WDKL-FM

All the rest of the call signs are still in use. :)
Funny how you put WOAI instead of WOIA.

In the 1973 publication of Starship Radio, they have many early DJ Station Histories. Under WLS, along with John Records Landecker being at WTRX, WERX, and WILS, it shows the same misprint, WOAI, leading many in the industry to quote that John had worked at the legendary 50000 watt Class I-A WOAI in San Antonio, TX, the ORIGINAL Clear Channel Communications station. :)

WWWW-FM moved three miles further West fairly recently. It would be a nightmare for them to relocate again, with WDKL having moved so much closer, as you noted.
Last edited by Ben Zonia on Mon May 02, 2022 10:53 am, edited 1 time in total.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Mon May 02, 2022 10:21 am

WWWW-FM 102.9 has a decent measured DA pattern from what I remember seeing in the L2C application, one that would be neat to rotate and flip to the mirror image, to be used by other stations, because we know the design works well in practice. The key would be that the placement of driven and parasitic elements on the tower would be flipped to a physical mirror image, and the whole thing rotated to the proper azimuth.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Thu May 05, 2022 12:32 pm

The rules regarding stations on second and third adjacent channels in the same general Metropolitan Area before circa 1964 are on Page 1-148 of the 1960 NAB Engineering Handbook. It excludes two Class Bs 400 or 600 kHz apart within the same Metropolitan district, (e.g. Grand Rapids and Holland were allowed on 95.7 and 96.1 because they were separate Metropolitan Areas. Then because they were short spaced beginning in 1964, 96.1 was allowed to move in under Section 73.213 rules at that time.) However, presumably Class As (1 kW ERP and 250 feet HAAT maximum at the time) were allowed in nearby cities 400 and 600 kHz spaced, generally 400 kHz in major cities, "in order to provide equitable and efficient distribution of facilities". A lot of those are near Chicago and other large cities.

When the first Table of Distance Separation Requirements was written, stations Class A to Class B and Class B to Class B on second and third adjacent channels were required to be 40 miles apart, which actually allowed them to be 39.5 miles with rounding. Class A was then also allowed to be 3 kW ERP and 300 feet HAAT at that time. In all the fanfare and opposition about "drop ins" under Docket 80-90 and subsequent related rulings, it was lost on the Broadcasting Industry that some very significant Distance Separation Requirements ACTUALLY INCREASED, Class A to B to about 43 miles, and Class B to B to about 46 miles, even before 6 kW Class A rules. That was and is the source of a large percentage of stations suddenly becoming short spaced, and seriously complicating transmitter location changes. Many Class A stations remain at 3 kW/100 meters because of all this, and WQKL 107.1, and WGRT 102.3 are a couple of them fairly near Detroit.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

User avatar
MWmetalhead
Site Admin
Posts: 11871
Joined: Sun Oct 31, 2004 11:23 am

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by MWmetalhead » Fri May 06, 2022 7:38 am

I agree that W4's directional pattern is amazingly accurate. WCEN's is another I would place in that category.



User avatar
Ben Zonia
Posts: 2143
Joined: Sat Jun 03, 2006 10:35 pm
Location: Honor

Re: WLLZ Applies To Move To Diplex With WDET

Post by Ben Zonia » Fri May 06, 2022 9:55 am

MWmetalhead wrote:
Fri May 06, 2022 7:38 am
I agree that W4's directional pattern is amazingly accurate. WCEN's is another I would place in that category.
Chicago's own Larry Langford, Jr. related the story of the Directional Antenna at an FM station he owned. His consulting engineer told him that FM DA design was a lot like sausage making.

Pattern quality varies between manufacturers. The old WFBE DA at the FCHS site was good. The late CE Ed Rauch bird dogged the manufacture of it, and if he wasn't satisfied, they went back and redid it. The new WFBE DA on the North WTRX tower, and the WLAV DA on the WGVU tower have much deeper measured nulls than the FCC envelope pattern requires. If you want to see the measured patterns, look at the Exhibits in the License to Cover Applications online. The mirror image, rotated WWWW measured DA looks like it would work well for a station I have in mind that is operating nondirectional with very reduced ERP from what could be done with a GOOD measured DA toward larger cities to be served in the market, and protecting the Section 73.215 short spaced stations.


"I had a job for a while as an announcer at WWV but I finally quit, because I couldn't stand the hours."

-Author Unknown

Post Reply Previous topicNext topic