: Re: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
Earlier this evening, shortly after our local sunset, KPWX owned 1130.
No sign at all of CKWX which normally owns 1130 up here. This went on
for quite some time until they powered down and then CKWX was heard.
Wow! That far North. No wonder people in the Frasier
I did note both stations on Haida Gwaii last month, but mostly
tonight, I'm hearing CKWX at 100% copy with no QRM whatsoever, here in
Victoria,
At LSS Mt. Angel drops power from 25 KW (?) to 490w to the South, so
CKWX does take over the frequency. But during the day, it is a different
story.
I think right now, the CKWX QRM is being reported in the late afternoons
on the Lower Mainland during drive time, but I would guess the QRM must
be in the mornings too. Not an issue during the middle of the day as yet
anyway.
Patrick
Patrick Martin
Seaside OR
KGED QSL Manager
Why not move it to 1570 or 1580?
- Original Message -
From: Patrick Martin mwd...@webtv.net
To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club ofAmerica
irca@hard-core-dx.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: [IRCA] RE 1130 interference
I was informed tonight
@hard-core-dx.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 1:28 AM
Subject: Re: [IRCA] RE 1130 interference
I was informed tonight by a friend that in 1952 CBU moved from 1130 to
690 as the CBC was concerned about exactly what has happened. I guess I
did not realize that 1130 is a Canadian Clear
I know we're discussing this over and over again.. but something will be
worked out, wether officially on the books or privately between the two
stations.
If I recall, CKWX isn't protected against skywave interference at critical
hours or something like that.. Scott Fybush mentioned it a day or
CKWX, as it's a Cdn clear...
- Original Message -
From: Paul B. Walker, Jr. walkerbroadcast...@gmail.com
To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America
irca@hard-core-dx.com
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 5:47 AM
Subject: Re: [IRCA] RE 1130 interference
Move CKWX
Paul,
What I did not realize was 1130 is a US clear along side of the Canadian
Clear, that makes the difference as both countries use it for 50 KWers.
The interference is too close to combat.
73,
Patrick
Patrick Martin
Seaside OR
KGED QSL Manager
Not 1580, as there is another station close by (KGAL), but 1570 would be
open, even 1110 maybe, if KBND was protected, 1100, nearest there is SF.
There are lots of possibilities, if the FCC would ok them, but as you
know changing freq. is not easy to get oked always either.
73,
Patrick
Patrick
Earlier this evening, shortly after our local sunset, KPWX owned 1130. No
sign at all of CKWX which normally owns 1130 up here. This went on for quite
some time until they powered down and then CKWX was heard.
Mike in St. Isidore, AB
___
IRCA
Earlier this evening, shortly after our local sunset, KPWX owned 1130.
No sign at all of CKWX which normally owns 1130 up here. This went on
for quite some time until they powered down and then CKWX was heard.
Wow! That far North. No wonder people in the Frasier Valley are
complaining.
73,
I know the amount of darkness in the afternoons and late in the mornings
with the sun being so low, as it never really gets bright daylight in
Dec/Jan on the OR coast and BC would even be more in darkness, so I can
se Mt. Angel QRMing during most of the day. I get skip all day in
Dec/Jan here.
P.S. Too bad CKWX can't go to 1135 khz. VOA in the Philippines did just
that for a time from 1143 to 1147.5 kHz. hi.
Patrick Martin
Seaside OR
KGED QSL Manager
___
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@hard-core-dx.com
I was informed tonight by a friend that in 1952 CBU moved from 1130 to
690 as the CBC was concerned about exactly what has happened. I guess I
did not realize that 1130 is a Canadian Clear as well as as an American
Clear. 690 on the other hand is a Canadian Mexican Clear. If 1130 was
a Canadian
I did note both stations on Haida Gwaii last month, but mostly tonight, I'm
hearing CKWX at 100% copy with no QRM whatsoever, here in Victoria,
BC..Walt
On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 5:28 AM, Patrick Martin mwd...@webtv.net wrote:
I was informed tonight by a friend that in 1952 CBU moved from
I actually thought about that..lol.
They're probably asusming that the 50KW CP will be granted and using that to
help their case.. since to listeners, 50KW is alot more then 25KW in their
mind. although the actual difference between 25KW and 50KW aren't much at
all.
On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at
I have e mailed CKWX twice, without a reply. So they know it.
Patrick
Patrick Martin
Seaside OR
KGED QSL Manager
___
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@hard-core-dx.com
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this
Patrick Martin wrote:
I have e mailed CKWX twice, without a reply. So they know it.
Of course they do.
There are two things going on here: one is the public story CKWX puts
out to its listeners, and one is the negotiating that's taking place
behind the scenes between CKWX and KPWX.
There are two things going on here: one is the public story CKWX puts
out to its listeners, and one is the negotiating that's taking place
behind the scenes between CKWX and KPWX.
I can believe that as most people don't have a clue why there is
interference. All they know, is they don't like it.
Patrick Martin wrote:
I can believe that as most people don't have a clue why there is
interference. All they know, is they don't like it. CKWX is a very
popular News station covering the Lower Mainland and Vancouver Island,
so I am sure the complaints are everywhere.
Doubtful. The reason the
Scott Fybush wrote:
It's rather a long, complex read, but here's the engineering exhibit from
KPWX's application for a power increase:
http://bit.ly/9A6DWx
Scott, this won't open (at least here).
Does anyone know for sure if KPWX is indeed running 50kw? If not, CKWX ain't
heard nuthin'
How can KPWX run 50KW when the Permit to do so hasn't even been granted yet?
(It hadn't been when I checked Friday morning)
Paul
On Sun, Oct 10, 2010 at 5:57 PM, Pete Taylor p...@comcast.net wrote:
Scott Fybush wrote:
It's rather a long, complex read, but here's the engineering exhibit
If they are running 25KW, they have to be sending a ton of signal to the
NW, as I am 100 miles from them and their signal matches the 50 KWers in
Portland in signal. I can easily see why they QRM CKWX near LSS.
73,
Patrick
Patrick Martin
Seaside OR
KGED QSL Manager
Paul B. Walker, Jr. wrote:
How can KPWX run 50KW when the Permit to do so hasn't even been granted yet?
(It hadn't been when I checked Friday morning)
You should therefore write CKWX and tell them that since they are stating that
the station is running 50,000 (sic) kilowatts.
Pete Taylor
Patrick Martin wrote:
Scott,
Don't we have something in International laws to protect CKWX?
That's what I've been trying to explain. There's an international treaty
signed by the US and Canada in 1984, formally known as the Agreement
Between the Government of the United States of America
Scott,
OK, it is the critical hours that are not covered. It seems that slipped
through the cracks. Thanks for the reclarification.
Now today, Mt. Angel is weaker this morning and CKWX is on top. It
sounds like they are trying to make a change. The same was true on
Sunday.
73,
Patrick
Bill,
With 50KW ERP to the North, the Mount Angel QRM is not going away.
Infact, as it gets towards Winter, the QRM will last longer in the
morning and start earlier in the afternoon. The only way the QRM will go
away if Mt. Angel drops power, changes their directional pattern, or
goes off the
: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
Bill,
With 50KW ERP to the North, the Mount Angel QRM is not going away.
Infact, as it gets towards Winter, the QRM will last longer in the
morning and start earlier in the afternoon. The only way the QRM will go
away if Mt. Angel drops power, changes
Patrick Martin wrote:
Why in the World did the FCC ever allow this
station to come on, is beyond me, as CKWX should be protected as they
have been on 1130 for decades. CKWX needs to really raise the roof on
this to the FCC.
Here's how this all plays out, as I understand it:
As a Canadian
Thanks Scott. I agree, it is not pretty, but I am sure CKWX has the
power and money needed to handle everything legal. In the meantime, if
anything is done, the listeners in the Frasier Valley will suffer.
I guess they can wire the money needed to buy the Mount Angel station
and shut it down. hi.
Getting a low pwoer relay or changing format of an FM is much tougher in
Canada then in the US.. you have to get approval to change formats even in
Canada
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Patrick Martin mwd...@webtv.net wrote:
Thanks Scott. I agree, it is not pretty, but I am sure CKWX has the
Patrick Martin wrote:
There is gotta be something CKWX can do, as their listeners in the
Frasier Valley are putting with the interference.
I'm sure CKWX wishes it were so - but there really may not be much they
can do, at least in the short term. The FM dial in the Puget Sound
region is so
'
AM: Modified Sony ICF 2010 barefoot
--- On Thu, 10/7/10, Scott Fybush sc...@fybush.com wrote:
From: Scott Fybush sc...@fybush.com
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America
irca@hard-core-dx.com
Date: Thursday, October 7, 2010, 2
My read isn't that this is a daytime skywave issue but rather a
sunrise/sunset issue, although the same solution might still help.
It's the same thing, is it not? The reason CKWX gets hammered just after
sunrise and just before sunset is because the skywave hasn't died down
yet, so those 25
ICF 2010 barefoot
--- On Thu, 10/7/10, sc...@fybush.com sc...@fybush.com wrote:
From: sc...@fybush.com sc...@fybush.com
Subject: Re: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
To: Mailing list for the International Radio Club of America
irca@hard-core-dx.com
Date: Thursday, October 7, 2010, 4:47 PM
My
It is, but my thought was that sunrise/sunset enhancement will still be
there even if they used larger towers.
The height of the towers controls the takeoff angle for the skywave. If I
understand it correctly, the shorter towers give off more high-angle
radiation, which means a shorter distance
part of the
problem CKWX is experiencing from KPWX is the result
Is it just a coincidence that the 2 sets of call letters are
so similar sounding?
(Their towers are
really, REALLY short - 53 electrical degrees in height, compared to 90
degrees for a more typical class B station and 190
At 128 feet, no they don't have to be lit unless they are in the flight path
of an airport.
On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 5:29 PM, rfoxw...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
part of the
problem CKWX is experiencing from KPWX is the result
Is it just a coincidence that the 2 sets of call letters are
so
rfoxw...@tampabay.rr.com wrote:
part of the
problem CKWX is experiencing from KPWX is the result
Is it just a coincidence that the 2 sets of call letters are
so similar sounding?
I believe so, yes. Those aren't the original calls - they were picked
after the station was sold to Amador
neilkaz wrote:
Scott There was a time when the FCC would not have licensed
53-degree towers for a 50 kW stations.
KAZ replies that there was a time when our FCC had integrity and
wasn't a pawn of big corporarations and wasn't 100% clueless in
regards to both AM and FM engineering and
The height of the towers controls the takeoff angle for the skywave.
If I understand it correctly, the shorter towers give off more
high-angle radiation, which means a shorter distance to the first skip
back to ground. There will still be skywave if they raise the height of
the towers, but it will
Scott,
Don't we have something in International laws to protect CKWX? I
don't know if CKWX sells in the Frasier Valley, but a loss of revenue
might create a lawsuit? Like you, I have no clue, but I don't see how
some station can just get the okey from the FCC to build and cause QRM
42 matches
Mail list logo
