Oh yeah, the FAA won't like that. Interesting thought! Besides, who knows what else the outage has affected.
As for the number of repeaters near by, I would agree, there are a lot. But, I wonder how many have power sources that don't need fuel, or that are vulnerable to a mishap like the site under consideration. My point was not that we need more repeaters (as you just showed is not needed), or that everything is off line (because it isn't), but that power supplies for various parts of the system should be reconsidered and evaluated to provide a level of redundancy and security in the event that generators fail, the mains get taken out by a backhoe or ice storm, or if severe WX keeps any one "small" problem active for an extended duration.
I'm not a repeater trusty or manager, so I just wanted to make the suggestion, knowing that there may be backups in place. I don't know. However, I'm a firm believer that when something goes off line, everything needs checked to reduce the probability of it happening again.
Hopefully the tower company will get their tails in line and fix the problem soon.
73 folks,
Tommy Brooks--KG5ZSU
toggle quoted message
Show quoted text
-------- Original Message --------
On Dec 8, 2021, 1:36 PM, Michael Fowler < michael@...> wrote:
I gotta say we are repeater plentiful in this region. In an actual EMCOMM event, the entire ETECS network is online among other personal/private repeaters that are available for use. I also second the fact that one side of the split is online when programmed into a radio correctly.?
Honestly the gross incompetence of the tower company may get them in trouble at this point. I doubt the FAA will be taking it lightly that the tower has been without beacons/lighting for this long.?
