> Remember-the CONTROLLER is controlling the transmitter, NOT NWS! You as
> the trustee have programmed the controller to do a certain function when
> it receives a certain input. As long as you have means to override it
> and turn it off remotely, YOU are controlling the transmitter.
> Now, when this occurs, the repeater is no longer operating as a
> repeater, but as a remotely controlled station, so 'automatic
> opertation', as defined by the FCC, cannot occur.
That also means that since you are not in automatic operation, you must
have a control operator monitoring, capable and ready to perform that control
24/7 or else shut the repeater down when such an operator is not present.
Non-automatic operation does not permit unattended operation. Given that, why
not let the operator switch on the NWS receiver instead of having it happen
"automatically"?
Actually you are splitting hairs here. Sure the controller is controlling
the transmitter, but the NWS would be controlling the controller if it caused it
to make the transmitter transmit, whether that was initiated by the trustee when
setting up the controller, by the NWS operator when sending out the alert, or by
some broadcast station that originates an EAS alert that is relayed by the NWS.
It could be argued, that since the transmission would not have occured without
the NWS action, THEY are the controller.
By the way, I favor allowing ham repeaters to automatically retransmit NWS
and EAS alerts including Amber Alerts. It's just that I feel the current rules
prohibit that practice. As the Co-chair of the southern NV, Inyo County CA
Emergency alert committee (Las Vegas Area), and co-vice chair for the State of
NV committee, I'd love to see more ways for the alerts to get out. But
Legally!!!!
Bill Croghan, CPBE, WB0KSW
Chief Engineer,
KOMP/KXPT/KENO/KBAD
Lotus Broadcasting, Las Vegas, NV
Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
