sowny.net | The Southern Ontario/WNY Radio-TV Forum


You are not logged in. Would you like to login or register?

June 17, 2019 10:50 am  #1


Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

CKIS-FM has applied to the CRTC for a pretty big power boost, supposedly because of interference from WBEE-FM on the same frequency in Rochester, N.Y.
 
According to the Rogers’ filing, the problem is the most profound in Oakville, Halton Hills, Milton, Ajax, Pickering and Uxbridge. In a move you rarely see, the station asked listeners on air to text them about reception problems and say they received 150 reports of interference, most of them from those areas.
 
As a result, they want the Commission to allow them to increase their output on the First Canadian Place tower to an effective radiated power of 21,000 watts from the current 13,000.
 
Here are some of the “key facts” they submitted to the deciders in Hull, including who they consider their main adversary in this market:
 
-Among past year listeners to both CKIS and its primary competitor CKFM, reception difficulties for CKIS are more pronounced in the Western and Eastern regions of the Toronto radio market than they are in the rest of the Toronto market.
 
-Reflecting these reception difficulties, CKIS has been unable to build an audience across the Toronto radio market. Weekly listening and audience share for CKIS are significantly lower in the Western and Eastern regions than they are in the rest of the Toronto radio market.
 
-These reception difficulties in turn place CKIS at a competitive disadvantage to commercial FM stations broadcasting from the CN Tower. Weekly radio listening to CKIS is significantly lower in the Western and Eastern regions than it is in the rest of the Toronto radio market, unlike each of the FM stations broadcasting from the CN Tower.
 
They claim the increase won’t interfere with adjacent stations or those nearby 92.5, although I wonder how those outlets will feel about that claim.
 
And even CFTO is involved in the signal study. From the engineer’s report:
 
“The second harmonic of 92.5 MHz falls within television channel 8. CFTO-DT provides service in the area and is slated to go to CH8 as part of the DTV repack, in early 2019. (Note: This has already happened.)
 
"Since the stations are near-co-located, it is expected that there will be no issues as a result of large signal differentials. Nonetheless, the applicant is aware of the situation and undertakes that complaints of interference will be investigated and appropriate measures will be taken to remedy the situation at the applicant’s own expense.” 

No word on when the Commission will make its decision but Monday was the final day for interveners to submit their comments. 

 

June 17, 2019 11:37 am  #2


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

A few thoughts on this. KISS FM didn't arrive until 1993. There has been a permanent Rochester station on 92.5 since 1965. So, when KISS arrived they had a signal null to the east as part of their licence, to protect Rochester. How far east is considered their primary coverage area? I don't consider Oshawa part of the GTA  Before KISS arrived Rochester was available in Oakville/Mississauga etc during tropho periods. Signal was anything but reliable. Now that KISS occupies 92.5, it is laughable to suggest there is any co-channel interference from Rochester in the west end. Rogers says KISS is at a signal disadvantage by transmitting from First Canadian Place while the competition beams from the CN Tower. Is there a reason why KISS doesn't transmit from the CN  Tower? No more room? Perhaps Rogers finds it cheaper at First Canadian Place. If they went to the CN Tower, that would solve their so called coverage problems without a power increase. But that might cost more money.

 

June 17, 2019 11:45 am  #3


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

mace wrote:

Rogers says KISS is at a signal disadvantage by transmitting from First Canadian Place while the competition beams from the CN Tower. Is there a reason why KISS doesn't transmit from the CN  Tower? No more room? Perhaps Rogers finds it cheaper at First Canadian Place. If they went to the CN Tower, that would solve their so called coverage problems without a power increase. But that might cost more money.

They'd make back the extra money it would cost to transmit from the CN tower in like, a month. They'd obviously be there if they could. For one, it's full. Further, and I'd be interested if this is true from one of the engineering-minded folks who hang out here, it may not be possible to properly protect WBEE and others from that height.
 


 
 

June 17, 2019 12:14 pm  #4


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

FYI...the application was posted today.  public comments are open until july 17.

 

June 17, 2019 12:45 pm  #5


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

splunge wrote:

FYI...the application was posted today. public comments are open until july 17.

You are correct. I must have misread the date. Thanks for the correction. 

     Thread Starter
 

June 17, 2019 1:05 pm  #6


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

mace wrote:

Is there a reason why KISS doesn't transmit from the CN  Tower?

The CN Tower has a common antenna for FM and it's nominally omni-directional (roughly sending out equal levels of energy in all directions).

In order to protect WBEE in Rochester, CKIS has to use a directional antenna which radiates as little energy as possible in the direction of WBEE's coverage area. The plus side with a directional antenna is that energy in WBEE's direction is "pushed" in directions other than what needs to be protected.

What this application asks for is an adjustment in what the antenna pattern is, along with an increase in power. A superficial analysis shows the CKIS signal will improve for all areas except in the Niagara Region. Even with the power increase, the new antenna pattern will see a reduction in energy going in that direction.

 

June 17, 2019 6:51 pm  #7


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

It was always a poor choice in frequency. Wouldn’t 92.7 have been be a better choice?
They would have to address Trent Radio in Peterborough.

 

June 17, 2019 8:26 pm  #8


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

andysradio wrote:

It was always a poor choice in frequency. Wouldn’t 92.7 have been be a better choice?
They would have to address Trent Radio in Peterborough.

And the big CJBX signal from London, too. And 92.9 in Buffalo - anything co-channel or first-adjacent to the big Buffalo signals (CFMZ on 96.3 vs. WMSX on 96.1, CKFG on 98.7 vs. WKSE on 98.5, CIRR on 103.9 vs. WHTT on 104.1) has to be relatively limited in power. I'm not sure how 96.3 managed its relatively high power level, which is still significantly less than the big CN Tower FMs.

As others have noticed, even if you could rebuild the combiner at CN to handle more signals and more power, the CN Tower FM antenna is omnidirectional and therefore usable only by nondirectional FMs, which pretty much eliminates CKIS.

 

 

June 18, 2019 6:01 am  #9


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

My thinking was being on a first adjacent from Buffalo might work better than co-channel with Rochester

 

June 18, 2019 8:41 am  #10


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

you may not "consider" oshawa to be part of the gta... but it is.

 

June 18, 2019 9:51 am  #11


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

andysradio wrote:

My thinking was being on a first adjacent from Buffalo might work better than co-channel with Rochester

Years ago, a few of my amateur radio friends (RF Engineers) and I built an FM repeater system that gave us the opportunity to study the effects of co-channel verses adjacent channel effects. The base stations ranged from 30 to 100 km apart.

Taking what we had learned, I've analyzed co-channel verses adjacent channel behavior with applicable FM broadcast signals on First Canadian Place. The conclusion I've come to is that adjacent channel is less "harmful" to signal integrity than co-channel.

Here's what I would use today to make an evaluation. Assume all other factors (ERP, EHAAT and site location) are equal:

First Adjacent 98.7 Toronto / 98.5 Niagara Falls.
Co-Channel:  105.1  Toronto / Niagara Region
Co-Channel:  106.5  Toronto / Buffalo

With the first adjacent channel,  98.7 Toronto, I encounter much less interference than the co-channel examples. (And 98.7 also has to deal with an extremely powerful local 2nd adjacent at 99.1.) 

So why doesn't 106.5 move to 106.7? Part of the justification for the co-channel arrangement is engineers believe FM's inherent capture effect will keep these signals clean within the primary coverage area.

However, real life reception dynamics (e.g.: multipath distortion, tropospheric ducting) prove that even when fairly close to the transmitter site, the Toronto co-channel stations on 105.1 or 106.5 will get clobbered momentarily by the distant stations.

The operators of 106.5 are obviously aware of the situation and seem to have chosen to mitigate the problem with harsh audio processing. Not only does the station sound terrible when reception is fine, but the effect of the compression is it's configured to sound like the distortion they're trying to mitigate.

 

June 18, 2019 3:25 pm  #12


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

the original hank wrote:

you may not "consider" oshawa to be part of the gta... but it is.

I had the same reaction.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Greater_Toronto_Area
 

 

June 18, 2019 4:49 pm  #13


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

mace wrote:

I don't consider Oshawa part of the GTA  Before KISS arrived Rochester was available in Oakville/Mississauga etc during tropho periods. Signal was anything but reliable. Now that KISS occupies 92.5, it is laughable to suggest there is any co-channel interference from Rochester in the west end. .

I would argue Oshawa is actually considered part of the GTHA/GTA.   This is backed by many sources.

If you travel on the QEW through Mississauga/Oakville, KISS does have interference.   I have noticed at some points, it completely drops out to be taken over by WBEE during some weather conditions.     I think Rogers has a case here.   It does not give them any huge increase in audience, but fixes areas they should be able to cover CLEARLY.   Mississauga should be able to get Kiss without effort.  



  

 

June 18, 2019 6:10 pm  #14


Re: Rogers’ KISS-FM Asks CRTC For Big Power Boost

Tim Brown 2016 wrote:

andysradio wrote:

My thinking was being on a first adjacent from Buffalo might work better than co-channel with Rochester

Years ago, a few of my amateur radio friends (RF Engineers) and I built an FM repeater system that gave us the opportunity to study the effects of co-channel verses adjacent channel effects. The base stations ranged from 30 to 100 km apart.

I don't recall the ISEDC standards off the top of my head (since it's not where I do my work), but whether it's ISEDC or the FCC, there are specific rules about how co- and adjacent-channel FMs may interact. On this side of the lake, they're defined in section 73.207 of the FCC rulebook, generally by mileage spacings (which depend on the class of each station) - but you can also use another section of the rules, 73.215, to move a little closer based entirely on contour non-overlap. 

It gets even more complex when the border is involved. There's a section of 73.207 that specifically addresses US stations protecting Canadian allotments, but of course both sides play games with how those allotments are written in. There are a lot of unbuilt allotments that still have to be protected - when I moved an 89.7 in the Finger Lakes to 89.5, we had to show protection to an 89.5 in Deseronto, and of course no such signal has ever been on the air there. And there are specific allotment restrictions written in on both sides - I engineer a 103.9 here in Rochester now, and our class A allocation has a specific provision limiting us to no more than 3 kW equivalent along a specific azimuth toward Peterborough (CBBP). 

For lower-powered signals, like translators and LPFM, there's an unwritten convention that allows us to show that our 34 dBu signal (a very, very far fringe) won't hit Canadian soil at all; Canadian regulators apparently tell the FCC that they won't object to anything that weak.