so where does XWA Montreal fit into it?

[Doug Drown]

Here in north central Maine, I live almost exactly equidistant from Montreal 
and Boston (Montreal to the west/northwest, Boston to the south).  CJAD 
comes in here during the day, but not well; too many mountains in the way, I 
suppose, as well as interference from CHRC.  CJAD's signal can be heard much 
better south of here, especially in the Augusta-Lewiston area, where it 
comes in really quite clearly.  At night, CKLW dominates, hands 
wn.   -Doug









----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Dan.Strassberg" <dan.strassberg@att.net>
To: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>; "Garrett Wollman" 
<wollman@bimajority.org>
Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 12:58 PM
Subject: Re: so where does XWA Montreal fit into it?


> It would be interesting to know CKLW's NIF value. I suspect it is not
> as low as you think. Between PJB and XELO (at least those were the two
> call signs decades ago), there was a lot of QRM on 800. Neither of
> those stations may have been very strong in New England, but southwest
> of Windsor, their skywaves were pretty strong. Also, CKLW is nulled in
> that direction at night and I've heard that it is largely inaudible in
> Illinois at night. As for how CJAD was shoehorned onto 800, it was
> possible because there was an 800 in Quebec City (CHRC?) that CKLW had
> to protect. As a result, as you swung (and as you swing--CKLW's
> pattern has not changed) northward from Boston, CKLW dropped off
> fairly rapidly. If you look at CKLW's and CJAD's night patterns, they
> are rather similar. Both are kind of L shaped with major lobes to the
> north (northwest for CJAD; northeast for CKLW) and substantial lobes
> to the east. Forgetting for the moment that CKLW is 50 kW-U but CJAD
> is 10 kW at night, CKLW has the stronger eastern lobe. Another
> interesting characteristic of CJAD is that despite its use of very
> tall towers (195 degrees; unusual in Canada, where short AM towers are
> quite common), its pattern RMSs are mediocre (~355 mV/m/kW @ 1 km,
> whereas, you'd expect something close to 400). It should be possible
> to achieve those RMS values with towers about 100' shorter than the
> ones CJAD uses.
>
> -----
> Dan Strassberg (dan.strassberg@att.net)
> eFax 1-707-215-6367
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Kevin Vahey" <kvahey@comcast.net>
> To: "Garrett Wollman" <wollman@bimajority.org>
> Cc: "Boston Radio Interest" <boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org>
> Sent: Friday, March 06, 2009 12:18 PM
> Subject: Re: so where does XWA Montreal fit into it?
>
>
>> CKLW's daytime signal is simply astonishing. In the Big 8 years not
>> only did it rule Detroit but was also #1 in Cleveland and it also
>> did
>> well in Buffalo.
>>
>> Nights they were one of the strongest skywave signals in New
>> England.
>> A tip of the hat to the person who designed the pattern as it was
>> about as perfect as you could get.
>>
>> On 3/5/09, Garrett Wollman <wollman@bimajority.org> wrote:
>>> <<On Thu, 5 Mar 2009 13:08:09 -0600, Kevin Vahey
>>> <kvahey@comcast.net> said:
>>>
>>>> I would love to know how CKLW 800 Windsor wound up with an almost
>>>> defacto clear channel. For most of its history it acted as a
>>>> Detroit
>>>> station until the CRTC clamped down with CANCON.
>>>
>>>> Can it be traced to the fact that Windsor was in the most southern
>>>> point of Canada?
>>>
>>> Well, it's certainly well south of all the other Canadian 800s,
>>> which
>>> gives it a chance to have some east-west components in its night
>>> pattern where all the others are oriented north-south (mostly
>>> north).
>>>
>>> -GAWollman
>>>
>>>
>