Re: WJIB Night-time power

[mwaters@wesleyan.edu (Martin J. Waters)]

>Dan Strassberg wrote:
>In due course, another Toronto station will occupy 740. Bet on it! It may
>be one of the existing stations--most likely CHUM (currently on 1050)--but
>it might also be a new station. If CHUM moves to 740 (and CFRB moves to
>860, the frequency from which CJBC bumped it back in the 40s), there will
>be a big game of musical chairs with Toronto area stations moving up to
>better facilities. All of the Toronto AMs are 50 kW (only CHIN 1540 is less
>than 50 kW at night), but the facilities are far from equal.

        Even if Canada reserves those frequencies, some U.S. stations would
benefit if the less desirable frequencies among the Toronto allocations
eventually stay silent as a result of the shuffling up to more desirable
assignments. I'm thinking particularly of WINS and WEVD in New York.
Without the Toronto stations, 1010 and 1050 are almost like U.S. Class A
channels. WINS and WEVD are subject to vicious skywave interference from
the Toronto stations surprisingly close to NY, although it seems to vary
greatly from night to night. Where I am, 90 miles from NYC, I had Toronto
on 1010 obliterating WINS a couple night ago. On another night, I'll get a
signal from WINS at night that sounds good to excellent.
        I wonder whether eventually Canada will negotiate something with
the U.S. over the unwanted AM frequencies -- maybe in return for something
like a different deal on spacing of FM stations? And if it did, what would
the U.S. do with those channels?
        IMO, it should allocate them for a few high-power stations, rather
than let all the light-bulb power stations operating at night on them now
increase their power somewhat and make those channels into just another
jumble of nighttime interference with signals that get out clearly for
maybe 10 miles or so. For AM to remain a viable broadcast band in the U.S.
at all, it needs more signals that give good coverage of entire metro
market areas. It already has plently of lesser signals. 740 and 860 would
be especially good for my idea, because there are two I-A channels on both
sides of 740, and 860 is flanked by three I-As and a I-B with only one
class A station on it, so there are relatively few adjacent-channel
stations that have to be protected from interference if some high-power
stations were to be considered.
        As to the FCC doing what I suggest, please repeat after me, "Fat
chance." More likely scenario: Tons of applications for 2.63 kW days, 1.19
kW nights, 1.87 Kw CH mornings, 1.77 KW CH evenings, DA-4, using 12 towers
day, 16 towers night, different sets of towers, pattern aimed directly away
from the local population center, changing the city of license to whatever
town the antenna is in, and asking for an exemption from the minimum
interference-free signal requirement.
        <Uhhh. Accidentally triggered rant mode off.>

>What I find more interesting is whether the new occupants of 740 and 860 in
>Toronto will continue for very long to transmit from the existing shared
>740/860 facility. One of the CBC's complaints was that, with the growth of
>interference in Toronto, the nondirectional signals emanating from a point
>northwest of downtown Toronto were inaudible in the main business district.
>All the rest of the Toronto AMs are directional to the north and east and
>transmit from sites south and west of the city. Quite a few are on the
>south shore of Lake Ontario. From there, the signals reach the city over a
>fresh water path. Fresh water is nowhere near as good a conductor of AM
>signals as salt water is, but it is still pretty good. Were the new
>occupants of 740 and 860 to directionalize their signals (not to protect
>other stations but to put a better signal into Toronto from a relatively
>distant site), WJIB and all other US stations on those frequencies would be
>likely to receive less nighttime interference, although reduced
>interference is hardly a sure thing.

        On 740, the U.S. station in Huntington, N.,Y., might not do so
well, since it's roughly southeast of Toronto. Its night signal of 40 watts
or whatever might get bombed even more with a DA.
        I also wonder, Why didn't the CBC ever go to DAs or otherwise fix
their signal problems? How about moving the transmitter site? A related
question is why Canada set the 50 kW limit on its I-A/now A stations at
all. It has a vast territory and there was no particular reason for the 50
kW limit in terms of international dealings, as those channels were, almost
without exception, for Canada to use as it saw fit. If 740 and 860 were 150
kW, I'll bet they wouldn't have their downtown Toronto problems. And, as
far as I understand the treaties, they could go to 150 kW tomorrow and all
the U.S. stations that use those channels at night would just have to take
whatever interference they received.

------------------------------