4 ms·

There was calls for this after Hurricane Katrina but... > Federal regulators have rejected proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission that woul

There was calls for this after Hurricane Katrina but... > Federal regulators have rejected proposed changes by the Federal Communications Commission that would require all U.S. cell phone towers to have at least eight hours of backup power. https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-cell-towers-fcc-120108-2008dec01-story.html https://www.sandiegouniontribune.com/sdut-cell-towers-fcc-12... (court challenge was CTIA Wireless Assn v. FCC, et al, No. 07-1475 (D.C. Cir. 2008)) The current regulations only cover fixed line or fixed-line-like wireless services https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/12.5 https://www.law.cornell.edu/cfr/text/47/12.5

vaxman 7y ago
Batteries have to be maintained and that would be a very counter productive use of a lot of money. A better solution is to require cell phone manufactures with over one million installed units in a given region to include an AM radio feature, even if it only enables when there is no cell service for a while. I know that some AM stations were taken out along with cell towers, but AM signals travel far and there is no doubt that many with an AM receiver in those areas could at least receive a broadcast from out of the area, especially if the local stations are not broadcasting interference. For extra credit, include auto Morse code detection (for even longer range broadcasts and also hearing impaired).
- jacobush 7y ago
  Hell, mandate FM too, it can't be hard. Many "Message to the Public" systems in the world use FM.
- cesarb 7y ago
  I never saw a cell phone with an AM receiver, only FM receivers; there might be some technical reason why AM receivers on phones are harder. Perhaps it might be because AM uses AFAIK lower frequencies than FM (phones with FM receivers already have to use the headphone wire as the antenna, and lower frequencies need longer antennas).
  - mikestew 7y ago
    Over forty years ago I had a transistor AM radio that fit in a shirt pocket. I would use it to listen to WXL in Chicago from my Indianapolis area home some 200 miles away. Despite holding an amateur radio license, I have no idea about the antenna design in that radio. I do know that it worked. So I don’t know if it’s a matter of antennas, or a matter of “who listens to AM anymore?”

vaxman 7y ago

Batteries have to be maintained and that would be a very counter productive use of a lot of money. A better solution is to require cell phone manufactures with over one million installed units in a given region to include an AM radio feature, even if it only enables when there is no cell service for a while. I know that some AM stations were taken out along with cell towers, but AM signals travel far and there is no doubt that many with an AM receiver in those areas could at least receive a broadcast from out of the area, especially if the local stations are not broadcasting interference. For extra credit, include auto Morse code detection (for even longer range broadcasts and also hearing impaired).

jacobush 7y ago
Hell, mandate FM too, it can't be hard. Many "Message to the Public" systems in the world use FM.
cesarb 7y ago
I never saw a cell phone with an AM receiver, only FM receivers; there might be some technical reason why AM receivers on phones are harder. Perhaps it might be because AM uses AFAIK lower frequencies than FM (phones with FM receivers already have to use the headphone wire as the antenna, and lower frequencies need longer antennas).
- mikestew 7y ago
  Over forty years ago I had a transistor AM radio that fit in a shirt pocket. I would use it to listen to WXL in Chicago from my Indianapolis area home some 200 miles away. Despite holding an amateur radio license, I have no idea about the antenna design in that radio. I do know that it worked. So I don’t know if it’s a matter of antennas, or a matter of “who listens to AM anymore?”