Re: Fight the BPL

[N2EY]

In article >, Dave Holford
> writes:

>JJ wrote:
>>
>> Dave Platt wrote:
>>
>> >
>> > It has also become apparent that some very senior FCC officials are
>> > woefully ignorant about radio. Political appointees, I suppose.
>>
>> Most of the FCC senior officials are lawyers who don't have a clue
>> about the technical side of radio. They wouldn't know a door knob
>> from a transistor. Come to think of it, a know lot of hams that
>> don't either.
>
>
>Maybe, but IIRC the FCC, along with the FAA, FEMA etc. etc. operate
>extensive HF communications systems. It seems unlikely that a source of
>such serious potential interference to their own communications would be
>authorized?
>
>Dave

Three possibilities, Dave:

1) Those federal agencies are clueless about the interference potential of BPL
(not very likely)

2) Those federal agencies figure that since their facilities are not located in
residential areas and will not get their 'net access via BPL, there isn't much
they need to worry about (possible, but not likely)

3) Those federal agencies are sitting on the sidelines while the "civilians"
hash out the details and do the hard work of making proposals and comments. If
the ARRL and amateurs can get BPL squashed or controlled, those federal
agencies don't have to do a thing. (likely?)

73 de Jim, N2EY

[Dick Carroll]

N2EY wrote:

> 3) Those federal agencies are sitting on the sidelines while the "civilians"
> hash out the details and do the hard work of making proposals and comments. If
> the ARRL and amateurs can get BPL squashed or controlled, those federal
> agencies don't have to do a thing. (likely?)

I doubt it, but for sure one can't be sure.So many organizations seem populated
with something other than proficient talent that such things seem to get
overlooked.
One wonders about that with NTIA and the 60 meter fiasco.
I know if I was in a position of responsibility in *any* organization I'd sure
not sit by and allow this to go forward opposed only by other users when my
organization had a serious vested interest in the outcome.

Dick

[Brian]

Dick Carroll > wrote in message >...
> N2EY wrote:
>
> > 3) Those federal agencies are sitting on the sidelines while the "civilians"
> > hash out the details and do the hard work of making proposals and comments. If
> > the ARRL and amateurs can get BPL squashed or controlled, those federal
> > agencies don't have to do a thing. (likely?)
>
> I doubt it, but for sure one can't be sure.So many organizations seem populated
> with something other than proficient talent that such things seem to get
> overlooked.
> One wonders about that with NTIA and the 60 meter fiasco.
> I know if I was in a position of responsibility in *any* organization I'd sure
> not sit by and allow this to go forward opposed only by other users when my
> organization had a serious vested interest in the outcome.
>
> Dick

Perhaps the organization's vested interest isn't so serious. bb