EAS - LP1 - Translators

OK here is a scenario.

You are required to monitor an EAS LP1 (primary) station who also has a translator, and the translator's signal is signifigantly stronger than the station's primary signal. Are you allowed to monitor the translator as the LP1 or must you monitor the primary signal of the EAS LP1?

> OK here is a scenario.
>
> You are required to monitor an EAS LP1 (primary) station who
> also has a translator, and the translator's signal is
> signifigantly stronger than the station's primary signal.
> Are you allowed to monitor the translator as the LP1 or must
> you monitor the primary signal of the EAS LP1?
>

Wow...good question! I would *think* that you would be required to monitor the primary signal, since your assignment is based on actual station, and not on a station's "programming".

For example, if you monitor the translator, and you don't get a test because the translator was down, but the originating station was broadcasting, who's responsible for the missed test? The owner of the translator, or you?

Does anyone else have an opinion, or better yet, know the rule on this?<P ID="signature">______________
</P>

> > OK here is a scenario.
> >
> > You are required to monitor an EAS LP1 (primary) station
> who
> > also has a translator, and the translator's signal is
> > signifigantly stronger than the station's primary signal.
> > Are you allowed to monitor the translator as the LP1 or
> must
> > you monitor the primary signal of the EAS LP1?
> >
>
> Wow...good question! I would *think* that you would be
> required to monitor the primary signal, since your
> assignment is based on actual station, and not on a
> station's "programming".
>
> For example, if you monitor the translator, and you don't
> get a test because the translator was down, but the
> originating station was broadcasting, who's responsible for
> the missed test? The owner of the translator, or you?
>
> Does anyone else have an opinion, or better yet, know the
> rule on this?

The monitoring plan calls for you to monitor the LP1...not its translator...
only the main signal is the one mentioned in the plan and that IS the signal you must monitor.

Im out

Just for clarification, I am NOT in this scenario.
I just wanted to throw it out there, I have been wondering it myself for a little while.

The girlfriend's answer to this question is:

"What is E-A-S ?"

She's not stupid either.
Just goes to show you the effectiveness of it here in the Northeast.

<P ID="edit"><FONT class="small">Edited by TXengineer on 06/14/05 05:15 AM.</FONT></P>

> Just goes to show you the effectiveness of it here in the
> Northeast.

You mean it is effective somewhere?

> > OK here is a scenario.
> >
> > You are required to monitor an EAS LP1 (primary) station
> who
> > also has a translator, and the translator's signal is
> > signifigantly stronger than the station's primary signal.
> > Are you allowed to monitor the translator as the LP1 or
> must
> > you monitor the primary signal of the EAS LP1?
> >
>
> Wow...good question! I would *think* that you would be
> required to monitor the primary signal, since your
> assignment is based on actual station, and not on a
> station's "programming".
>
> For example, if you monitor the translator, and you don't
> get a test because the translator was down, but the
> originating station was broadcasting, who's responsible for
> the missed test? The owner of the translator, or you?
>
> Does anyone else have an opinion, or better yet, know the
> rule on this?
>

Every local area has a secondary station (LP2), which is also supposed to be monitored (yeah, right). If the LP1 signal is really bad, I would think the right thing to do is monitor the LP2. This is similar to the former EBS system, which rarely worked like it was supposed to in my personal experience, but it was better than no system. I don't think monitoring any translator for this purpose has ever been considered proper procedure, since the translator is in theory a separate "station" and not the designated LP1.<P ID="signature">______________
Electricity is really just organized lightning.
~George Carlin</P>

In the mountain west..colorado/arizona/utah/even parts of New Mexico there is monitoring off translators/cable and even satellite due to terrain obstructions which make the primary signal impossible to monitor. It has never been called into question during field inspections...

you do what you have to do to get the job done.

> > Just goes to show you the effectiveness of it here in the
> > Northeast.
>
> You mean it is effective somewhere?
>

Nope.

I dare the federal gov't to actually try a national alert test and we'll see if it works. If you want to see one of the biggest jokes yet, that would be it. Look at the "plan" and tell me that it's going to work. If it would make it past the east coast it would amaze me.

Did we use the EAS system during "911"? I DONT THINK SO. What is this damn thing worth other than turning around Tornado, Amber, and other local emergencies/information?<P ID="signature">______________
--- THE Insultant ---</P>

Ha ha, thats good.

Look at what happened a few months ago when Connecticut had an evacuation notice.

You see how we all took it... a bunch of engineers calling one another to see what piece of equipment malfunctioned!

If there was a national emergency alert on EAS, I can assure you that you'd have a bunch of board ops on the phone with the CE's who will be calling the LP1's CE's to find out what is going on...

It works great...

> If there was a national emergency alert on EAS, I can assure
> you that you'd have a bunch of board ops on the phone with
> the CE's who will be calling the LP1's CE's to find out what
> is going on...

Assuming there's a board op to call the CE.

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>

> > If there was a national emergency alert on EAS, I can
> assure
> > you that you'd have a bunch of board ops on the phone with
>
> > the CE's who will be calling the LP1's CE's to find out
> what
> > is going on...
>
> Assuming there's a board op to call the CE.
>
> -A
>

And assuming that there's a CE!<P ID="signature">______________
</P>

EAS - worked here

Hi,

It worked here on the TV side during the tsunami warning. Under 2 minutes from the time the warning was posted on the California disaster information web site until it was splashed all over my TV. It may be even less, since I was printing out the bulletin as the announcement was coming over the TV.

John

> And assuming that there's a CE!

True.

-A<P ID="signature">______________

</P>