SirRoxalot said:
Even Conelrad recognized the need for redundancy. What happens if your "news station" is wiped out by the storm? With clustering these days, one building goes down, and a whole group of stations is off the air.
Not true on both counts. CONELRAD did not go through station studios; the feds controlled the transmitters directly with connections to the transmitter site. Even with "manned" sites (it was the 50's and many sites required licensed operators) the on and off controls came from the CONELRAD coordination site, not the studios. Then, as now, there were relatively few shared AM sites.
CONELRAD was not "redundant" as the whole concept involved controlling transmitter sites, and AM only (All FMs had to shut down).
A "cluster" is generally consolidated at the studio level only for AM (as I said, comparing FM is irrelevant) so the transmitters remained and still remain independent. If there is concern for clustering, then the EAS-type systems in the future should have some type of provision to be switchable to transmitter sites, or a failure of the studio location should hand control of the transmitter to another location. This point that you raise is valid in that direct to transmitter broadcasts might be worthy considering... although transmitters, particularly towers and antennas, are the most vulnerable part of a station.
It's likely in most markets that more than one station will either have news coverage and delivery trained staff or an alliance or cross ownership with TV or newspapers and have access to audio feeds... even directly to the transmitter.
I think back to the 70's in two different top 15 markets where I worked (both have frequent hurricanes and close calls). Although the FCC still required news and PA and such, only a couple of stations in each market had the facilities to cover news on their own. The rest did rip and read, or just had a news person in mornings. In both markets, stations were staffed with live people at all times, but I'd no more trust the night or overnight people I employed or those of my competitors to give information and advice about hurricanes than I would to give me stock market advice.
Oh, right, I forgot. It doesn't matter anyway because radio has nothing to offer during a hurricane anyway.
Again: during the passage of the hurricane itself (depending on ground speed, around 12 to 15 MPH and size of storm, from 200 to 500 miles wide) the hurricane strength winds may last 12 to 15 hours. During that time, the only thing that can be said is "stay indoors." Going out and being killed by a branch traveling at 150 MPH should be enough reason to stay inside; not being able to close the door afterwards is another. Being crushed by a falling tree or rolling car are even more reasons.
There will be no power. Listeners will have been told to store water in pots and pans and in the bathtub well in advance, as we know the approximate paths days in advance. Once the storm hits, minor changes in course are meaningless when a hurricane is hundreds of miles wide, and radar simply tells you what you already know... and none of that data is actionable as people can't seek shelter or move around for the same reasons given above. Stay indoors till the winds subside is the only message. Since the real dangers come afterwards with floods, it's then that the follow-up coverage can begin... remembering that electricity may take a week or more to return... long after many people have run out of batteries. (For me, Hugo meant 9 days without light and Georges was 11 days at a suburban home in the foothills.)
