Is WOQL Transmitting From NH

[Shellanswerman]

> > And, though far from scientific, the presence of WPKQ does
>
> > constrict WKNE's signal to the northeast/east.  Topography
>
> > doesn't help them either - though WOQL does seem manage
> > despite that issue.
>
> I agree. There is no way that WPKQ should have ever been
> allowed (back when they were , what WZPK or WMOU-FM?) to
> place a class C station on the top of Mt Washington so close
> to WKNE-FM. It was a really bad decision by the FCC. Ever go
> to Peterborough, only 10 miles away, you get a mix-mosh of
> both stations.
>
> WOQL is south-east of Keene, in a completley different
> topographic area. So the signal from WOQL is much different.
> (WOQL for instance comes in very well up in Peterborough and
> Rindge).
>
Would it be out of the question for WKNE-FM to move to 103.5?

[Jim]

> I agree. There is no way that WPKQ should have ever been
> allowed (back when they were , what WZPK or WMOU-FM?) to
> place a class C station on the top of Mt Washington so close
> to WKNE-FM. It was a really bad decision by the FCC. Ever go
> to Peterborough, only 10 miles away, you get a mix-mosh of
> both stations.

I agree!  Bad Bad decision on the part of the fcc.  and now WPKQ has a CP with a non-directional antenna.  I would assume this would make things worse.  I agree with the poster below that 103.5 would be better, but WODS would probably have a problem with that.  I don't think it would bother WODS's signal that much though.  WKNE could even notch their signal a bit to the SE.  It would still give them more coverage. I don't think the spacing is enough according to Fcc guidelines. The thing that gets me though, I now live in the south.  Most stations are 100kw in the south and many are very close together.  I'll give some examples if you ask me, but my point is, the fcc seems much stricter in the NE>

I remember growing up in Belmont, Nh listening to "103KNE."  They were CHR and I loved them!  The only CHR I could get at that time.  One day in 88 or 89, WMOU fired up on Mt Washington and blasted away at their signal.  I was so upset...until of course WMOU evolved into  CHR "The Peak."  That was short lived though.  They went back and forth from Hot AC, to Modern AC to CHR, back to Hot AC.  It was ridiculous!

[lesabre]

> > > And, though far from scientific, the presence of WPKQ
> does
> >
> > > constrict WKNE's signal to the northeast/east.
> Topography
> >
> > > doesn't help them either - though WOQL does seem manage
> > > despite that issue.
> >
> > I agree. There is no way that WPKQ should have ever been
> > allowed (back when they were , what WZPK or WMOU-FM?) to
> > place a class C station on the top of Mt Washington so
> close
> > to WKNE-FM. It was a really bad decision by the FCC. Ever
> go
> > to Peterborough, only 10 miles away, you get a mix-mosh of
>
> > both stations.
> >
> > WOQL is south-east of Keene, in a completley different
> > topographic area. So the signal from WOQL is much
> different.
> > (WOQL for instance comes in very well up in Peterborough
> and
> > Rindge).
> >
> Would it be out of the question for WKNE-FM to move to
> 103.5?
>
Would that create a problem with 103.5 WQBJ in Cobleskill NY, which I believe is 50kw. Ever travel up I-89, that's a total mess with both 103.7's. Neither one has any signal in the Lebanon area. KNE-FM has an great signal into Vermont and even into to very eastern NY state.

[TXengineer]

<<35 lines of previous text deleted>>

> Would that create a problem with 103.5 WQBJ in Cobleskill
> NY, which I believe is 50kw.

Yup. B to B , co channel, requires a minimum of 241kM in distance, WKNE to WQBJ is 173kM.

WKNE to WPKQ is close, they are 162kM apart, and the rule requires 274kM.
However WPKQ's CP is merely issued to cover the COL change from Berlin to North Conway, they are in fact not removing the directional antenna.
When the FCC Form 301 was filed, all the directional portions were filled in, however "non directional" was checked, so the antenna information was lost...

WPKQ can not legally operate ND.

[encarta95]

> Would it be out of the question for WKNE-FM to move to
> 103.5?

Interestingly, that would be the only 103.5 in New England were that to happen. It's the only commercial frequency in the region not to have a tenant.

[TXengineer]

> Interestingly, that would be the only 103.5 in New England
> were that to happen. It's the only commercial frequency in
> the region not to have a tenant.

You mean aside from WCCH 103.5 in Holyoke, MA right?

[lesabre]

> > Would that create a problem with 103.5 WQBJ in Cobleskill
> > NY, which I believe is 50kw.
>
> Yup. B to B , co channel, requires a minimum of 241kM in
> distance, WKNE to WQBJ is 173kM.
>
> WKNE to WPKQ is close, they are 162kM apart, and the rule
> requires 274kM.
> However WPKQ's CP is merely issued to cover the COL change
> from Berlin to North Conway, they are in fact not removing
> the directional antenna.
> When the FCC Form 301 was filed, all the directional
> portions were filled in, however "non directional" was
> checked, so the antenna information was lost...
>
> WPKQ can not legally operate ND.

Isn't PKQ also directional towards Montreal to protect a low power 103.7 there ? I know you could pick up WHOM in Montreal before RadioCanada went from 690 AM to 95.1 FM.
>