BBQ at Transmitter - Page 3
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 21 to 30 of 30

Thread: BBQ at Transmitter

  1. #21
    That would have been my question to you, Kelly. If something like that got started some time back, how could they not have known? Seems that's a lot of power going up there to take chances on.

    This would be something you'd want to watch out for at the Stonehenge tower?

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Grounded Grid View Post
    That would have been my question to you, Kelly. If something like that got started some time back, how could they not have known? Seems that's a lot of power going up there to take chances on.

    This would be something you'd want to watch out for at the Stonehenge tower?
    The master antenna at the Stonehenge tower is different. That's a Jampro spiral. The "Ratelco" master antenna at Cougar is a similar design, but I helped refine it after several years with the Stonehenge antenna. It has three sections, not 24 panels like WTM. Back in the 90's, we actually had a TX line failure in the upper antenna section of the Stonehenge antenna, though it was no where near as dramatic as the WTM2 BBQ. The Stonehenge antenna took a big lightning strike. Usually the transmitters will burp off long enough for the lightning charge to dissipate, then back on. One station had their VSWR protection bypassed because concern over potential nuisance trips. When the lightning hit, that transmitter continued running, sustaining the arcing. In the end we had to replace a 40' section of line inside the antenna pole, but that's about it. I currently (pardon the pun) don't have any stations at Stonehenge, but that antenna design is really good.

    I'm not sure how someone didn't notice the upward-creeping reflected power as those upper sections started failing. My guess? The antenna is owned by ATC, and included in the site lease. The station engineers probably just assumed ATC was monitoring the antenna, and because the fancy microprocessor-controlled VSWR fail safe system wasn't indicating a problem, nobody was paying attention.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post

    As said it could take one to two month to get the parts for the custom master antenna and then good weather will be needed. I too think it will be late winter early spring before they repair and return to the master antenna.
    Based on what I saw today, there isn't anything salvageable of the antenna. It's going to take longer than two months to build a new one. You don't want ERI to hurry something like that either.

    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post
    Right now Entercom. iHeart and Sandusky are most likely figuring out the best way get HD back and make it through the winter.
    You mean Hubbard?

    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post
    One option might be to install a temporary antenna below the burned up master antenna for the HD equipment to use only. keep the analog signals at the Aux site.

    2-Remove the HD equipment and transmitters (usually smaller than main) at Tiger before the road gets nasty and install gear at aux site to accommodate the HD. Maybe install an antenna for the HD at the Aux site. However I think the Sandusky stations are using new Nautel transmitters that combine the Analog and HD transmitter in one box. So they would have to bring in (buy or rent) an HD transmitter for the Aux site.
    Hubbard is working on installing a higher power HD-capable TX from Cougar as we type. Dave and Rob should have it on the air by tonight. Doubt ATC is going to let them, let alone have antennas made in time, to get WTC1 back up and running before the snow flies.

  4. #24
    Moderator/Co-Administrator
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    SoCal
    Posts
    37,654
    Quote Originally Posted by Kelly A View Post

    I'm not sure how someone didn't notice the upward-creeping reflected power as those upper sections started failing. My guess? The antenna is owned by ATC, and included in the site lease. The station engineers probably just assumed ATC was monitoring the antenna, and because the fancy microprocessor-controlled VSWR fail safe system wasn't indicating a problem, nobody was paying attention.
    If this was a steadily increasing problem rather than an instantaneous one, wouldn't ATC have liability for the damages based on not monitoring the antenna adequately?
    www.americanradiohistory.com
    Broadcasting Magazine and Yearbooks, Billboard, Cash Box, R&R, Record World, Music & Media, Audio, Television/Radio Age, R&R, Duncan's American Radio, Popular Electronics, Studio Sound, Broadcast Engineering, db, and more.

  5. #25
    I agree the antenna is a loss. I too wonder if the combiner on the ground sustained any damage. I see a long road for the re build and some high level litigating where attorneys will be involved. 6-12 months before the tower is operational for the FM stations, depending how the fingers point. I wonder if some stations/groups will bail on the site.

    As for HD. If there is room at the aux site for the equipment that might get the HD on the air faster than waiting to see the outcome of a round of high level finger pointing to re build the burned up master antenna. I think 4 stations were hybrid with separate HD transmitters. And if they don't have a backup transmitter at the "backup" now main site, then the HD transmitter can serve as an analog backup too.

    I wonder who will make more, the consultants or the attorneys.

  6. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidEduardo View Post


    If this was a steadily increasing problem rather than an instantaneous one, wouldn't ATC have liability for the damages based on not monitoring the antenna adequately?
    Not sure if there is any sort of a hold-harmless/binding arbitration clause in the lease, or whether there's a: share the antenna at your own risk..scenario. Like Steve mentioned, I suspect the least of the delay will be removing, building, testing, shipping, and installing a new antenna. Once the lawyers get involved, who knows how much added delay that alone will add.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post
    I wonder who will make more, the consultants or the attorneys.
    The attorneys. Make bank on it. No pun intended.

  8. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post

    As for HD. If there is room at the aux site for the equipment that might get the HD on the air faster than waiting to see the outcome of a round of high level finger pointing to re build the burned up master antenna. I think 4 stations were hybrid with separate HD transmitters. And if they don't have a backup transmitter at the "backup" now main site, then the HD transmitter can serve as an analog backup too.
    Not that many stations are doing high level combining for their HD anymore. Most have just up-sized their transmitters to do both. The new Nautel rig that Hubbard was in the process of installing at Cougar when the antenna flamed at WTM, does HD and analog. They're working to have that on the air tonight.

    All my transmitters are single HD/Analog units too. Just add an HD exciter and exporter. Done!

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by xmtrland View Post
    I agree the antenna is a loss.
    Hey Steve, PM'ed you with a link. Check your mail on this site.

  10. #30
    anyone know if there are still ports on the other combiner at tiger that some of the stations (other than 106.1 who already did) could move to? I noticed that 96.5 has a CP in for the other tiger site now.

    If memory serves all of them were originally on the entracom combiner before ATC went up anyway.

    John

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  




     
Our Conferences
Useful Contacts
Community


Contact Us