[BC] Remote Control Access via Internet

[Paul B. Walker, Jr.]

Scott:

>From one small station operator to another....if you can save money and
still get the job done right.. do it!!

Paul Walker
Operations Manager/Program Director
WABV-AM 1590 Abbeville, SC, USA
www.walkerbroadcasting.com
www.wabv1590.com


On 2/21/07, Bailey, Scott <sbailey at nespower.com> wrote:
>
> I have Verizon, so I think the same applies here as well.
>
> But this is what I'm thinking Chris, why spend the money on a Burk
> ARC-16, when my automation system can do this. I'm using Digital Juke
> Box, and Jim Barcus has a program that can send you an email if
> something goes wrong with any part of DJB or if an event didn't occur.
>
> Scott
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
> [mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Chris Oradat
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:59 AM
> To: 'Broadcasters' Mailing List'
> Subject: RE: [BC] Remote Control Access via Internet
>
> Most remote controls that allow TCP/IP connections have a provision for
> e-mailing alerts.  If you can adjust what is sent out, that message can
> be
> sent to a cell phone.  It just requires knowing the e-mail address of
> the
> phone.  For at least two providers (Cingular, T-Mobile), this is
> included
> with text messaging.
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net
> [mailto:broadcast-bounces at radiolists.net] On Behalf Of Glen Kippel
> Sent: Wednesday, February 21, 2007 11:52 AM
> To: Broadcasters' Mailing List
> Subject: Re: [BC] Remote Control Access via Internet
>
> You will need to have some way of having it contact you if something
> falls
> out of tolerance.  How you do this is up to you, and if you get
> inspected,
> be prepared to show how/that it works.  I don't know about internet,
> having
> used only dialup and/or SCA remote control, but at my previous station I
> had
> the ARC-16 call if the output power fell below 90% (this could be
> optional),
> rose above 105% (this is not), and if the ModMinder (R) showed
> consistently
> over modulation.  Of course, we had other things that are not
> FCC-required,
> like if the AC power was off, the building temperature got above 95
> degrees,
> or we lost an STL -- stuff like that.  You do not have to remotely
> monitor
> plate voltage, plate current, etc. unless you want to.  It can be handy
> to
> know these things before you get to the transmitter site, but the FCC
> doesn't require it.
>
> On 2/21/07, Bailey, Scott <sbailey at nespower.com> wrote:
> >
> > Question to the brain trust:
> >
> >
> >
> > I've read over the rules of unattended operation, and I have a
> question.
> > Does a station have to have a dial up phone line installed at the
> > transmitter for remote control or can a station control it transmitter
> > by internet access only, and do away with the dial up phone line?
> >
> >
> >
> > My thoughts were, and a discussion with another engineer was, the last
> > update of the remote control rules was around 1995, almost 12 years
> ago,
> > before we had wide open internet access.  My studio is with the
> > transmitter, and I can access my studio automation with my pocket pc,
> > via Verizon Broadband Wireless, or even Wi-fi. My studio automation
> can
> > lower and raise power on my transmitter, and turn it off. I can access
> > my automation system via logmein.com at home and control the
> transmitter
> > as well.
> >
> >
> >
> > What are the thoughts you guys have on this subject?  Do we really
> have
> > to have a "dedicated" phone line at the transmitter, if I'm using that
> > line for DSL service and my pc controls the transmitter, and I have
> > constant access to it?
> >
> >
> >
> > Scott
> >
>