[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Alternate site backups

To: mwaters@wesleyan.edu, boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org
Subject: Re: Alternate site backups
From: Larry Weil <kc1ih@mediaone.net>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2001 00:06:18 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20010927013532.79924.qmail@web12102.mail.yahoo.com>
References: <20010927013532.79924.qmail@web12102.mail.yahoo.com>
Sender: owner-boston-radio-interest@bostonradio.org

At 6:35 PM -0700 9/26/01, Martin Waters wrote:
>
>But, as I posted back then, I don't think stations
>should, or even should be allowed to, skip having a
>backup site because "just" 30 percent would be without
>service in some enormous catastrophe.

Marty, please get real!  To have a backup site with equivalent 
coverage to the main site would cost many stations well over a 
million bucks, not counting the needed maintenance and periodic 
testing.  It may sound nice, but it ain't gonna happen.

-- 
Larry Weil
Lake Wobegone, NH

References:
- Re: Alternate site backups
  - From: Martin Waters <martinjwaters@yahoo.com>
- Re: Alternate site backups
  - From: Martin Waters <martinjwaters@yahoo.com>

Prev by Date: "On TV Tonight"
Next by Date: Re: Satellite radio
Previous by thread: Re: Alternate site backups
Next by thread: Re: Alternate site backups
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread