Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
David wrote:
This is a failure of the EAS, not Clear Channel's business plan.
There ahould mechanisms in place to allow the local authorities to
override the regular programming when a time sensitive local emergency
warrants.

EAS is that mechanism. My understanding is that the local authorities
failed to activate it, or failed to activate an alternative local plan
that, if activated properly, would have alerted personnel who *were* on
duty at the Clear Channel stations and resulted in the broadcast of an
alert.

In any case, how much good would it have done if an alert had been
broadcast over Clear Channel's stations? They may have a 95% *share* of
the listening audience at 2am, but how many people are actually
listening to the radio in Minot, North Dakota at 2am?

The right place for this type of alert is NOAA Weather Radio.
Inexpensive radios are available that can be left on while sleeping,
that can be used to awaken the owner when something like this happens.
(you're not going to leave KZPR "Power 105" on all night every night in
case there's a disaster - the disaster will be when you try to function
in the morning without sleep!)

While we're at it, the EAS (and this should happen at the state level)
should be modified to stop running alerts over excessively large areas.
For example, several recent Amber Alerts issued *statewide* in
Tennessee in the early-morning hours. A Memphis resident can do nothing
about a child abduction in Bristol 400 miles away at 3am; if you keep
waking them up for this kind of alert, they're just going to turn off
their NOAA radio. (and next time there's a chemical spill in Memphis...)

AND NOAA should be an override on EVERY portable radio sold in the
country (programmable). IMO

deet

D Tiernan wrote:
AND NOAA should be an override on EVERY portable radio sold in the
country (programmable). IMO

I think you'd find if that were enforced, many bottom-of-the-line radios
would simply disappear from the marketplace, and many devices that
contain a radio essentially as an afterthought would simply drop the
radio function.

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:
D Tiernan wrote:
AND NOAA should be an override on EVERY portable radio sold in the
country (programmable). IMO

I think you'd find if that were enforced, many bottom-of-the-line radios
would simply disappear from the marketplace, and many devices that
contain a radio essentially as an afterthought would simply drop the
radio function.

A few decades back there was an "all channel radio bill" introduced in
Congress that would have mandated that all radios over $15 be FM
capable. Did that ever get off the ground?

Bob wrote:
A few decades back there was an "all channel radio bill" introduced in
Congress that would have mandated that all radios over $15 be FM
capable. Did that ever get off the ground?

Y'know, I don't know!

Of course, today there are a lot of radios out there that *only* get FM.
(usually not very well...)

I'm inclined to think the relative extra cost of adding NOAA to an
inexpensive AM/FM portable today would be considerably greater to that
of adding FM to a early-1970s AM set. You'd need an alphanumeric
display and enough buttons to handle programming. Either that, or you'd
put in a NOAA receiver that simply opens up whenever it detects modem
tones, without bothering to decode the data. I suspect most customers
wouldn't stand for that. The addition of FM to an AM set simply
involved adding an AM/FM switch and inscribing a few more numbers on the
existing dial.

And then, there's the question of battery life.

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

In article lid writes:

I'm inclined to think the relative extra cost of adding NOAA to an
inexpensive AM/FM portable today would be considerably greater to that
of adding FM to a early-1970s AM set. You'd need an alphanumeric
display and enough buttons to handle programming. Either that, or you'd
put in a NOAA receiver that simply opens up whenever it detects modem
tones, without bothering to decode the data. I suspect most customers
wouldn't stand for that. The addition of FM to an AM set simply
involved adding an AM/FM switch and inscribing a few more numbers on the
existing dial.

Huh? The addition of FM involved a VHF front end, a different mixer
oscillator operating in the VHF range, different mixers, a different
detector, and in those days, AFC functions to deal with the problem
that the local oscillator drifted.

So, aside for the audio amp and the speaker, not much was common.

A NOAA receiver would need to find a NOAA signal to listen to ---
probably automatically, since most users would not bother to find one
locally, especially if they were traveling (think of the radio in a
car). It probably could be fixed on simple alert tones, but still,
would need the ability to find, tune, detect, and process the 162 MHz
narrow band FM signals. Not trivial, and of very limited value when
that radio is not in use.

If you live in tornado country, you probably want to keep a NOAA radio on
listening for alert tones all the time. When I was in Kansas last month,
my relatives there had one. A radio that is turned off most of the time
would not do the job.

Of course, in the San Francisco Bay area we are more likely to have
earthquakes than a tornado; earthquakes come with their own alerting system.

Alan

Alan wrote:
Huh? The addition of FM involved a VHF front end, a different mixer
oscillator operating in the VHF range, different mixers, a different
detector, and in those days, AFC functions to deal with the problem
that the local oscillator drifted.

No, I mean in terms of user interface.

'Course, I suppose in those days (early-mid 70s?) "internals" weren't
nearly as cheap as they are today.

Of course, in the San Francisco Bay area we are more likely to have
earthquakes than a tornado; earthquakes come with their own alerting system.

True enough. Though apparently you do occasionally get the same kind of
emergencies the rest of us do. One day, driving near Meridian,
Mississippi, I heard the EAS tones go off. Skies in Mississippi were
clear, with not a hint of severe weather. Announcer came on and said
"The National Weather Service has issued a severe thunderstorm warning
for...


Marin and Sonoma Counties in Northern California."


(it was a satellite-fed translator of a San Francisco station...)

--
Doug Smith W9WI
Pleasant View (Nashville), TN EM66
http://www.w9wi.com

Doug Smith W9WI wrote:


True enough. Though apparently you do occasionally get the same kind of
emergencies the rest of us do. One day, driving near Meridian,
Mississippi, I heard the EAS tones go off. Skies in Mississippi were
clear, with not a hint of severe weather. Announcer came on and said
"The National Weather Service has issued a severe thunderstorm warning
for...


Marin and Sonoma Counties in Northern California."


(it was a satellite-fed translator of a San Francisco station...)


Gee, I wonder who that would have been? Stares at feet.

JT

--








----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Unrestricted-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

In article ,
(Alan) wrote:

Huh? The addition of FM involved a VHF front end, a different mixer
oscillator operating in the VHF range, different mixers, a different
detector, and in those days, AFC functions to deal with the problem
that the local oscillator drifted.

Not to mention another IF strip. And in those days, VHF was literally
magic. When I was a kid, I built the Heathkit AM and FM tuners. The AM
tuner worked at power up. A couple of tweaks and it was ready for
action. The FM was stone dead when it came to output. I ended up taking
it down the street to an older kid's house (he was a ham) and he bench
aligned it for me; no other "repairs" were required. FM was touchy in
those days.

Now, VHF is practically DC.

--
John Higdon
+1 408 266 4400