according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000 watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area???? heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek. any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of cal state hayward???
-
Get involved.
We want your input!
Apply for Membership and join the conversations about everything related to broadcasting.
After we receive your registration, a moderator will review it. After your registration is approved, you will be permitted to post.
If you use a disposable or false email address, your registration will be rejected.
After your membership is approved, please take a minute to tell us a little bit about yourself.
https://www.radiodiscussions.com/forums/introduce-yourself.1088/
Thanks in advance and have fun!
RadioDiscussions Administrators
106.9 signal.....
- Thread starter only1deejayman
- Start date
> according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000
> watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
> in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> cal state hayward???
Many times, on FM, height is far more important than power. An 11,000 watt difference makes only a 4% difference in coverage, roughly.
>
> watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
> in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> cal state hayward???
Many times, on FM, height is far more important than power. An 11,000 watt difference makes only a 4% difference in coverage, roughly.
>
M
MichaelRivers
Guest
Also...KMEL's tower location is on Mt. San Bruno and KEAR is on Mt. Beacon.
> > according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000
>
> > watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> > heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
>
> > in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> > any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> > cal state hayward???
>
> Many times, on FM, height is far more important than power.
> An 11,000 watt difference makes only a 4% difference in
> coverage, roughly.
> >
> <P ID="signature">______________
Michael Rivers
Los Angeles</P>
> > according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000
>
> > watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> > heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
>
> > in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> > any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> > cal state hayward???
>
> Many times, on FM, height is far more important than power.
> An 11,000 watt difference makes only a 4% difference in
> coverage, roughly.
> >
> <P ID="signature">______________
Michael Rivers
Los Angeles</P>
ok, thanks for NOT answering my question, I want to know about repeaters, could they put 1 in the east bay area like on top of cal state hayward, that would sure give them some height.
J
Jaycifer
Guest
Don't mean to get off the subject but...Where is KCRH's (Cal State Hayward's station) antenna located?
> Don't mean to get off the subject but...Where is KCRH's (Cal
> State Hayward's station) antenna located?
>
um, well KCRH is CHABOT COLLEGE, not CSUH big difference, and KSUH is an internet station, not FM anymore. most cellular, sat., and acouple of FM's have repeaters atop Cal State Hayward's warren hall.
> State Hayward's station) antenna located?
>
um, well KCRH is CHABOT COLLEGE, not CSUH big difference, and KSUH is an internet station, not FM anymore. most cellular, sat., and acouple of FM's have repeaters atop Cal State Hayward's warren hall.
> ok, thanks for NOT answering my question, I want to know
> about repeaters, could they put 1 in the east bay area like
> on top of cal state hayward, that would sure give them some
> height.
>
Pretty much I would say if they don't have them now..they won't be able to get any boosters in the future.
As far as translators that is a NO also...FCC not authorizing any translators for commercial stations.
Bill
> about repeaters, could they put 1 in the east bay area like
> on top of cal state hayward, that would sure give them some
> height.
>
Pretty much I would say if they don't have them now..they won't be able to get any boosters in the future.
As far as translators that is a NO also...FCC not authorizing any translators for commercial stations.
Bill
> > ok, thanks for NOT answering my question, I want to know
> > about repeaters, could they put 1 in the east bay area
> like
> > on top of cal state hayward, that would sure give them
> some
> > height.
> >
> Pretty much I would say if they don't have them now..they
> won't be able to get any boosters in the future.
>
> As far as translators that is a NO also...FCC not
> authorizing any translators for commercial stations.
>
>
> Bill
>
There shouldn't be any problem with putting in a booster as long as its signal is contained within the 60dbu contour of the main station, providing that you can get past the NIMBYs. Someone without a monetary connection to a commercial station can own a translator.
> > about repeaters, could they put 1 in the east bay area
> like
> > on top of cal state hayward, that would sure give them
> some
> > height.
> >
> Pretty much I would say if they don't have them now..they
> won't be able to get any boosters in the future.
>
> As far as translators that is a NO also...FCC not
> authorizing any translators for commercial stations.
>
>
> Bill
>
There shouldn't be any problem with putting in a booster as long as its signal is contained within the 60dbu contour of the main station, providing that you can get past the NIMBYs. Someone without a monetary connection to a commercial station can own a translator.
The high-rise tower atop cal state hayward is slated to be demolished next year so no repeater will be going there...kkiq will have to move their's too.
> according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000
> watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
> in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> cal state hayward???
>
> according to radio-locator.com KEAR 106.9 signal is 80,000
> watts, so why can't we hear it in the east bay area????
> heck, 106.1 KMEL is 69,000 watts and you can hear it great
> in the valley, because of their repeater in walnut creek.
> any chance KEAR will ad a repeater or two, like on top of
> cal state hayward???
>
- Status