RadioBanter - View Single Post

March 26th 04, 12:01 AM

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

You seem heck-bent on starting some more internecine warfare in
here.

I'm simply asking a question. You are avoiding that question. One would
think
that a "radio electronics professional" with your claimed experience would
know the answer, but I guess you don't.

In that case you are wasting everyone's time. :-)

NOBODY has EVER worked with ANY sort of "antenna" that
stretches for miles..

Yes, they have. One type is called a Beverage antenna, after its inventor,
H.H.Beverage.

and has randomly-distributed "feed points"
from discontinuities all along both overhead and underground
electric power lines. That would be the case for Access BPL.

That part is unique.

That observation isn't rocket science. It can be done by anyone
in the vicinity of overhead power lines...and trying to find a
reference to such long-stretching antennas in the best library
anywhere (nothing there).

Look under "Beverage" ;-)

Trying to come close to a computer model, even with Roy
Lewallen's excellent EZNEC might be done...but only for one
specific community area.

Then go ahead and do it.

THINK. The electric power lines
WERE NEVER DESIGNED AS HF-VHF TRANSMISSION
LINES.

Why are you shouting, Len?

They work okay at 60 Hz. 60 Hz doesn't worry about
VSWR or discontinuities and those lines only need to worry
if a splice or other connection conducts and that everything is
insulated that should be insulated.

The electric power distribution lines don't even come close to
having any sort of constant impedance. LOOK. THINK about
observated spacings in overhead systems you can see at any
time there is sufficient light. Do you see uniformity? None
there. Go to another location and observe. Do you see any
uniformity to the first location? Maybe. Try another community.
Is that uniform? ELECTRIC POWER DISTRIBUTION LINES IN
CITIES WERE NEVER DESIGNED AS HF-VHF TRANSMISSION
LINES. THERE IS NO ELECTRIC STANDARD ANYWHERE
THAT SAYS THOSE MUST BE RF TRANSMISSION LINES.

I know all that, Len. I knew it way back in my Novice days, I knew it when I
first read about the BPL concept.

The question isn't *why* BPL is a bad idea. The question is how *amateurs* are
supposed to convince the *professionals* that BPL is a bad idea.

Should we do it by the methods you demonstrate, including the shouting (all
capitals)? Is that the way you professionals interact?

If you can't understand that, then you are just wasting time for
everyone with trying to troll for arguments in here.

I understand why BPL is a bad idea, Len. That's not the problem.

The problem is how to convince the FCC. For example, consider these quotes from
the Wall street Journal:

"The FCC and the utilities say new technologies have eliminated the
interference and accuse the hams of exploiting the issue for their own
gains."

'"We haven't seen the sun darken and everything electrical turn to
white noise and haze during a deployment," says Matt Oja, an executive at
Progress Energy, whose test Mr. Powell visited. "This is a fairly vocal
group that has been whipped into a frenzy by their organization." (ARRL).'

Or how about this one:

'Ed Thomas, the FCC's chief engineer, says the commission has spent a year
listening to the hams' concerns about power lines and is getting frustrated.
"Why is this thing a major calamity?" he says. "And honestly, I'd love the
answer to that."'

That's the *chief engineer* of the FCC saying that. Here it is again:

"Why is this thing a major calamity? And honestly, I'd love the
answer to that."

How do *amateurs* convince Mr. Thomas that BPL *is* a major calamity?

Now pull out your two degrees, wipe the dead ivy leaves from
them and show how YOUR "professionalism" says the Access
BPL will be safe and amateurs (or anyone else) won't have to
worry...go ahead, make everyone's day...

I've never claimed anything of the sort, Len. You're wrong - again...