[sbe-eas] Test Script in an RWT

[Stephen Weber]

When it comes to interpreting FCC rules, it is always best not to attempt to read in anything that is not explicitly stated.  Easy way to get in trouble...

Steve

From: Ed Czarnecki 
Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 6:12 PM
To: 'SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the Emergency AlertSystem and other emergency communication issues.' 
Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] Test Script in an RWT
Yes.  The rest was an attempt at “gallows humor” in light of the current TTS issue.

 

From: sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of Frank Lucia
Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 9:01 PM
To: SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the Emergency Alert System and other emergency communication issues.
Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] Test Script in an RWT

 

      I think that means that you can send the Header and EOM codes without the Attention Signal and an emergency message (audio).  Maybe a station wants to alert a downstream station to an alert.

       

      Just like an RWT which is codes only.

       



      --- On Wed, 3/14/12, Ed Czarnecki <ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com> wrote:


        From: Ed Czarnecki <ed.czarnecki at monroe-electronics.com>
        Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] Test Script in an RWT
        To: EASsbeList at cableone.net, "'SBE EAS Exchange - a mail list for discussion about the Emergency Alert System and other emergency communication issues.'" <sbe-eas at sbe.org>
        Date: Wednesday, March 14, 2012, 4:15 PM

        11.51(b) says that "When relaying EAS messages, EAS Participants may
        transmit only the EAS header codes and the EOM code without the Attention
        Signal and emergency message for State and local emergencies."  So the
        option is there to omit the audio and attention signal.  Which is probably a
        useful subsection, in light of this TTS prohibition for CAP devices.  I
        guess 11.51(b) covers the lack of audio from IPAWS (ducks for cover)...  


        -----Original Message-----
        From: sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org [mailto:sbe-eas-bounces at sbe.org] On Behalf Of
        Dave Turnmire
        Sent: Wednesday, March 14, 2012 4:02 PM
        To: sbe-eas at sbe.org
        Subject: Re: [sbe-eas] Test Script in an RWT

        On 3/12/2012 2:43 AM, Alan Alsobrook wrote:
        > ...Now you might could make an argument that you are required to use 
        > the attention signal should you include a message inside the data 
        > bursts, but that same rule conflicts itself stating that local & state 
        > emergencies are not required to use the attention signal at all.
        > ...
        So where is the rule that says "that local & state emergencies are not
        required to use the attention signal at all. "?  What I see is a rule
        (11.51(b)) that says you can dump the voice AND attention tone on
        state/local alerts (but WHY you'd want to... is another question).  But that
        would be compatible with the view that the existence of voice requires
        attention tones.

        Dave

        _______________________________________________
        sbe-eas mailing list
        sbe-eas at sbe.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas


        _______________________________________________
        sbe-eas mailing list
        sbe-eas at sbe.org
        http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas
     

 



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
_______________________________________________
sbe-eas mailing list
sbe-eas at sbe.org
http://seven.pairlist.net/mailman/listinfo/sbe-eas
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://seven.pairlist.net/pipermail/sbe-eas/attachments/20120314/b43b8e35/attachment.htm>