thanks
SS Trans 5000.
It will be a talking house here at Station one and then using either a SS Trans or another talking house with ATU for Transmitter site two.
i would like to see Hamilton, Info-spot, and Radio systems release the missing certification documents from the FCC website in their entirely minus schematics if they choose although schematics would be nice as well. but all the test photo's test conditions and results, SpecAn images, etc.
this would go very far to putting a lot of controversy about the ground lead issue to bed once and for all.
As of yesterday, a probe of the FCC website linking to documents applicable to Part 15 AM certifications returns one result, applying to one manufacturer.
This link to data provided by the certifying agency includes a graphic and text apparently provided by the manufacturer, suggesting the installation of such a transmitter and attached ~3-meter whip above a rooftop, using a long, "massive" conducting path to a buried ground rod near the building.
But such "ground' paths will radiate, whether they are massive, or not.
Sorry if this post is repetitive, but it is FAR less repetitive than those posts that don't recognize, or reject this reality.
I have wondered about a round high rise chimney-like structure packed with dirt and a ground wire buried in the center of this "tootsie roll", which would be very "massive".
But it sounds like the point-of reference unearthed by rich gives no dimensions at which a rising ground apparatus can be deemed massive.
Can you share the manufacturer in your probe?
the part 15's who that documentation belongs to though are not the ones that are the subject of this huge controversy.
Carl Blare asked: Can you share the manufacturer in your probe?
Let Google be your friend.
Google is not my friend.
Avoiding Google is believed by many to be a wise choice.