"Jim Hampton" wrote in
:

Len,

The purpose was, obviously, to let eveyone know what we knew in the
first place - BPL *will* cause interference. Whatever you may think,
this will also cause interference to low band VHF users as well. I
shan't get into who uses that.


I don't know who you have in mind, but the state police use it here. That
may be enough to kill BPL right there.


Best regards from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"Len Over 21" wrote in message
...
In article ,
(N2EY) writes:

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/06/28/2/?nc=1

Kudos to W0SR, ARRL, and all involved.

The major "kudos" ought to go to the Cedar Rapids team that put
together an excellent picture of a detailed example of their BPL
test system. One can see it in several Comments on docket
04-37 at the FCC ECFS.

"Kudos to ARRL?" Why? The Cedar Rapids amateur club
did all the work...had the calibrated instruments for valid data
collection. No computer simulations there. Actual on-air tests.

If someone wants to express gratitude to "all involved," the names
and callsigns are in the several 04-37 Comments of the last week.
Write them DIRECT, don't assume that "all" read this din of
inequity called a newsgroup.




---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.712 / Virus Database: 468 - Release Date: 6/27/04