[SBE] EAS CAP

[Richard Rudman]

The major points here are that the LP model perpetuates a daisy chain  
distribution topology and broadcasters should not be originating  
warnings.

Where possible, SECC's and LECC's should work with local and state  
emergency management to set up Local Relay Networks as Wash. State has  
done. Government should be the licensee for these LRN's, not  
broadcasters.

I have to agree with Clay on the use of SCA's - injection levels are  
just too low.

My 2 cents worth: I said some time ago that my vision of a CAP-capable  
EAS broadcast, TV or cable box in the future would be a rack mounted  
panel with some indicators on it and no buttons. The real power of CAP  
can only be realized when the consumer electronics industry starts  
building CAP awareness into radios and set-top converters for  
television. When that happens, warnings can either be done in the  
program stream or through separate displays or alarm functions.  
Warnings for hearing-impaired and sight impaired people could then be  
done reliably through either radio or TV.

Final thought: In my opinion the present RWT is useless since it does  
not carry all the components of a real EAS event. Properly originated  
tests that carry all components of a real alert could be originated  
from warning centers weekly.

Richard Rudman

On Oct 4, 2009, at 5:55 PM, k7cr wrote:


> Ed -

>

> Some thoughts on your posting - See below

>

> Clay

> ----- Original Message -----

> From: Edwin Bukont

> To: sbe

> Sent: Saturday, October 03, 2009 4:27 AM

> Subject: Re: [SBE] EAS CAP

>

> I have said for quite some time that what should happen is  

> ubiquitous distribution of emergency info by FM digital SCA.

>

> CF - Frankly I don't agree...for a number of reasons

>

> > SCA equipment is hard to find

> > Reception is touchy, at best

> > Stations always want to be paid for this spectrum

> > I feel that the distribution of Emergency Messages should be the  

> responsibilty of governments....NOT broadcasters.

>

> This could originiate at transmitter sites, including aux sites, not  

> studios. This could work even with HD radio.  Every primary station,  

> probably more than one per market, would have direct links to  

> authorities.

>

> CF - I agree that studios should not be in the picture...and I agree  

> there should be direct links from the authorities...but why use  

> broadcast stations for this purpose?...Here in Washington State we  

> have, what we call, Local Relay Networks.  Sometimes these are  

> public works repeaters that 'share' time for EAS.  Works great and  

> the infrastructure is already there.  More recently we have been  

> pressing for DEDICATED spectrum for this purpose.

>

>  That primary station could then decide if the info is to be  

> rebroadcast on their main program channel.  Stations downstream  

> would monitor the SCA, and rebroadcast it as an SCA, as well as  

> again decide if the content was to be used in the main channel.

>

> CF - I hear what you are saying...and it sure beats the 'Daisy- 

> Chain'.   Consider the fact that NO-ONE must use a Daisy Chain  

> unless their state - decided- that they wanted to.   This is NOT a  

> federal requirement.   This is why Washington did not use it.  It  

> was the lightning-rod of EBS and we decided that it was too  

> problematic to do it with EAS.  Too bad so many folks feel that the  

> Daisy Chain is the only way.

> This would solve NOAA/NWS problem of penetration into rural areas  

> not served by their own transmitters.

>

> CF - If broadcasters want to enhance the coverage of NWS - Then put  

> it on an HD-3 channel.  At least with HD you can go out and buy a  

> variety of receivers from a number of sources.  Try and do that with  

> SCA's

>

> What we have now, this daisy chain in the main program channel,  

> exists solely to appease a select few legacy broadcasters.

> CF - Again, Ed....This is a CHOICE !   Not a requirement.

>

> Regards, Clay

>

> Edwin Bukont CSRE, DRB, CBNT

> V- 240.417.2475; F- 240.368.1265

>

>

>

>

>

>

>

> > From: rar01 at mac.com

> > To: sbe at sbe.org

> > Date: Fri, 2 Oct 2009 22:07:00 -0700

> > Subject: Re: [SBE] EAS CAP

> >

> > As Clay Freinwald and others including myself have said for some  

> time,

> > the public internet should not be the only way stations get CAP

> > messages.

> >

> > Some of you may be familiar with the Local Relay Network (LRN)  

> concept

> > as is practiced in Washington State. Radio links act as wireless

> > multipoint distribution systems from warning centers to all EAS

> > broadcast entry points.

> >

> > The existing LP relay network perpetuates the daisy chain we all

> > thought we said good-by to when we left EBS. Getting EAS messages  

> from

> > warning centers to al broadcast entry points simultaneously. My

> > personal take (having served as an LECC Chair and still serving as  

> the

> > Vice-Chair for the California SECC) is that depending on an LP-1

> > creates a link in the warning chain that, if broken, will make it

> > highly unlikely (if not impossible) that any stations monitoring  

> that

> > LP1 will get the message.

> >

> > NWS/ NOAA Weather Radio has stepped in to effectively create LRN's

> > already in some areas. I believe if local civil warning centers link

> > up with NOAA weather radio and themselves license and operate LRN's,

> > we can create a much more robust platform that can be the basis for

> > EAS monitoring assignments in future LECC and SECC plans.

> >

> > There are proposals before FEMA and FCC for such wireless radio  

> links

> > (LRN's). Stay tuned.

> >

> > Richard Rudman

> >

> >

> > On Oct 2, 2009, at 9:14 PM, Thomas Shanks wrote:

> >

> > > This is my sticking point. Are they actually going to require  

> every

> > > station to have a disaster-proof Internet connection? The internet

> > > itself is not at all disaster-proof. The boxes really need to be

> > > listening for relay and relaying when the internet does not pass  

> the

> > > traffic first. The last thing we need is the FCC breathing down  

> our

> > > throats when the low-speed wireless internet connection to the

> > > transmitter site that uses routers a 1/4 mile in the air dies  

> for a

> > > few months due to a lightning strike. Relay should take over, and

> > > stations should be permitted to operate over the old relay for as

> > > long as technically required.

> > >

> > > Come on National Office! Get leeway out of FEMA on this!

> > >

> > > --

> > > Thomas Shanks CBRE

> > > Chief Engineer / chief.engineer at wrek.org / 404-894-2468

> > > WREK Atlanta, Georgia Tech Student Radio

> > > 40,000 Watts (100,000 in 2011!) of Quality, Diverse Programming  

> for

> > > the Georgia Tech community, Atlanta, and the World

> > > _______________________________________________

> > > The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> > > To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/ 

> sbe

> > >

> > > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

> >

> > _______________________________________________

> > The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> > To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

> >

> > http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe

> _______________________________________________

> The SBE Roundtable, SBE at sbe.org

> To unsubscribe, go to http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/options/sbe

>

> http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe


-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe/attachments/20091004/f1786c76/attachment-0001.html>