Subject: BPL Pilot Project In Cedar Rapids Shuts Down
From: (Len Over 21)
Date: 7/2/2004 4:33 PM Central Standard Time
Message-id:

In article , PAMNO
(N2EY) writes:

In article ,
(Len Over 21) writes:

Oddly enough, despite the urban myth of some objecting to BPL,
the FCC does NOT have any power to stop Access BPL!

Actually, they do.

NO, they don't have ANY ability to STOP any Access BPL.

Yes, they do.

All the FCC can do - at the moment and in what they will probably
have on a new R&O - is the ability to stop INCIDENTAL RF
RADIATION beyond the level established by the Commission.

Wrong....Again.

The broadband communications service over Access BPL can
CONTINUE in the USA.

Not as long as it creates interference.

All the FCC can do is put limits on the incidental RF radiation
from a BPL system, then enforce it.

It would be a simple matter for FCC to set the levels so low that none of
the
systems could come close to meeting it. That would effectively ban it.

But FCC won't do that. Yet.

FCC doesn't come even close to the German levels already
established.

Even so, the FCC CANNOT STOP Access BPL. Do you under-
stand your own error? Access BPL can, and already does, by
rather obvious examples, ALREADY EXCEED REGULATORY
STANDARDS on incidental RF radiation levels.

Then the FCC CAN stop it. Wether they will or not is subject to
debate. But they CAN stop it.

Read the NTIA Phase 1 and Phase 2 reports.

The NTIA does not enact nor enforce FCC rules and regulations.

Well, what are you going to DO about it? Just sit there and send
messages on a broadband provider talking all about "CW getting
through when nothing else does?"

No one has made that assertion in this thread, Lennie.

Please try to keep your emotions from interfering with judgement.

(oooooops....too late...)

The incidental RF radiation from overhead electric power lines is
going to affect ANYONE trying to listen on HF and some low-VHF
frequencies.

Uh huh.

And the FCC has issued dozens of letters to those carriers demanding they
clean up their act or else.

Would you refer to Chairman Powell as "Mikey" to his face? Would you address
your comments to FCC to "Mikey"?

Someone die and you were appointed New Headmaster?

Hell, yes, I would refer to FCC Chairman Powell as "Mikey" right
to his face...if I was commenting on the idiotic decisions to
abandon all existing radio services and government radio services
to the RF noise pollution of Access BPL.

And you'd be escorted out of the proceeding by federal marshals.

I see you're back to profanity to "effectively" express yourself.

Tsk tsk tsk. Fourteen years of night school, down the drain.

I've ALREADY addressed the ENTIRE COMMISSION as ignorant
on technical matters. They are. QED. Quod erat demonstrandum.
[it is as demonstrated] That's in public view, on the record.

So are your frequent misrepresentations of the character of Amateur Radio,
your military record, and your professional "career".

Your point?

What is that statement you make...another Sermon on the Antenna
Mount?

Another personal attack on someone who didn't attack you personally.

Putz.

The ARRL is NOT the major objector to Access BPL. You could see
that from the comments on dockets 04-37 or 03-104. But, you can't
see that and continue with the "praise the league" as if they were the
only group against BPL.

That's not what he said.

Nice try at yet another "smear the League".

The Iowa group and the affected amateur both publicly thanked ARRL for its
help.

What "help" did the ARRL do in Cedar Rapids, Iowa?

Identify that "help."

The Cedar Rapids group WENT OUT AND DID IT BY THEMSELVES.

They TOOK ACTION.

They didn't go around mumbling catechisms for the league and do
nothing. THEY DID SOMETHING.

Uh huh.

Supported by League elected field leadership.

They
aren't staffed or budgeted to oversee all the possible BPL
installation testing in the USA. The League's budget would have
to quadruple or quintuple to approach being able to do that...and
still not be enough.

How do you know what it would take, Len? Have you done it?
Have you sent a check to help out?

Why are you trying to start a Flame War on this?

He asked you a direct question.

What have YOU done to help support the anti-BPL effort?

I CAN do a fair estimation of man-hours because I've done fair
estimations of man-hours and effort on lots of contract
proposals in the past.

Uh huh.

A non-answer "answer".

Just what has the judgemental, finger-waving James Miccolis
DONE against Access BPL? Besides sit in here and wag a
disapproving finger and play space guru games in words with
Weiner von Brawn?!?

TWO personal attacks in one paragraph! How efficient!

Individual industry and local government (state on down) groups
haven't shown they have enough clout to make a difference in the
Commission's enthusiasm for BPL.

Regulation of radio is specifically a Federal function. State and local
governments cannot have any real clout - otherwise they'd be requiring
licenses and fees.

Clue: Access BPL is NOT a "radio service."

Clue: It IS a communications technique deployed via an FCC-controlled
medium.

Access BPL has INCIDENTAL RF RADIATION that is "not intentioned
to transmit any radio frequency information."

And that "incidental radiation" IS an FCC regulated value.

Access BPL is a broadband communications carrier. As such it
might be - at some future time - under FCC control IF IT CROSSES
STATE BOUNDARIES in providing such a communication service.
[the telephone infrastructure already crosses state boundaries by
default since the communications capabilities are so built-in]

It already IS under FCC control.

Pandora's Box has already
been opened. Lots of such Boxes in all of the 50 states. It's
going to be one helluva big task to close them.

Maybe. Or maybe a few good precedents will be set that will cause the rest
to
give up.

Are you going to break into a rendition of "Tommorrow" from the
musical "Little Orphan Annie?"

Are you ever going to participate in that "civil debate" that you always
lament others as allegededly not doing?

IFF is the old acronym for radar transponders. IFF is also an
older contraction in English meaning I, and only IF. This isn't
the former nor the latter and your wish fulfillment hasn't yet been
filled. The EXISTING ACCESS BPL SYSTEM *ARE* RADIATING
EXCESS RF ENERGY ON HF in every community that is trying
it out.

"Maybies" don't cut it.

Was there a point to be made other than your attempt to detour the
discussion over some typos?

Depends on the frequencies used. Not all BPL systems use the entire HF
spectrum. See ARRL descriptions of the Penn Yan (NY) system.

NONE of the Access BPL systems use the "entire HF spectrum."
Only MOST of it. Enough to cream any low-level received signals
in pseudo-random noise.

Why are you trying to hide from the obvious RF pollution?

A thorough read of Jim's posts indicate otherwise.

And at least Jim HAS a license that allows him to USE those HF
allocations.

Remember which administration brought out
the spectre of Access BPL to this nation while you and everyone
else are at it.

Not just this nation. The Canadians are at it:

BPL began in Norway 10 years ago, as PLC or Power Line
Communications. It didn't get far then.

The REPUBLICAN administration of NOW made broadband and
broadband over power lines a "big high-tech new thing" for rural
America. See MIKEY Powell's enthusiastic support in public.
See MIKEY Gallagher's enthusiastic support in public [NTIA].

Do you need pop-ups on your browser screen to understand
the toadying to the prez going on? Nationwide billboards (like
Wall Drug Store) to advertise it?

Or are you just trying to incite another newsgroup flame war?

Seems to me that YOU are the one suggesting one...

Not that you are known for discussing anything WITHOUT making a "flame
war" out of it...

Steve, K4YZ