[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
- Subject: Re: [IRCA] Re; 1130 Interference
- From: Scott Fybush <scott@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Thu, 07 Oct 2010 10:36:48 -0400
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 station, CKWX has no standing to complain directly to the
FCC. They complain to Industry Canada, which takes the issue to Canada's
equivalent of our State Department (the Foreign Ministry, I believe?),
which takes it to the U.S. State Department, which takes it to the FCC.
The problem is, there's a treaty that regulates AM radio along the
border. I'm working from memory here, so I may have some of the
specifics wrong, but when the Mount Angel station was applied for, it
had to make a showing that on paper, its signal would not exceed the
interference levels specified in the treaty.
The current treaty was written in 1984, and it provides for only
*groundwave* protection during daylight hours. In effect, the US and
Canada agreed to pretend that "critical hours" skywave propagation
doesn't exist.
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
I'd direct your attention to page 2, where the respected engineering
firm that did the application tells us that: "Good engineering practice
was followed for all measurements. Care was taken to avoid skywave
during early morning and late afternoon hours."
CKWX can certainly complain...but its complaint will be hampered by the
political reality that its own government signed a treaty 26 years ago
that pretty much authorized the interference it's now receiving. Even if
the treaty were to be amended (not an easy or quick process), stations
authorized before the adoption of the revised treaty would still be
grandfathered in.
It's not pretty...but that's international diplomacy for you.
s
_______________________________________________
IRCA mailing list
IRCA@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://montreal.kotalampi.com/mailman/listinfo/irca
Opinions expressed in messages on this mailing list are those of the original contributors and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of the IRCA, its editors, publishing staff, or officers
For more information: http://www.ircaonline.org
To Post a message: irca@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx