"jason" wrote in message
...
Hello,

No one on here seems capable of saying exactly what the problem is. I
don't
want to read long boring rambling emails! Just say what's wrong in a few
lines in your own words without pointing towards websites.

Well, personally, I took offence at the general comments about amateur radio
operators:

"UPLC also commented on amateur radio opposition to the technology, urging
the Commission to ignore "armchair amateurs that still use vacuum tube
transmitters" and listen to the reputable companies and entrepreneurs who
are the real experts on BPL and who have overcome enormous technical
obstacles to make BPL a reality in the U.S. "

Of course, those in the USA will probably be disputing much more than just
that, but as I am not in the US I could not make comment on the entire BPL
issue.

No doubt, we in Australia will soon be facing similar debates as the BPL
experiments continue down here!!! It would be good if the FCC decides BPL
is too risky - kind of set an example that operators in other countries can
use to argue their point!

Cheers

Martin, VK2UMJ


"Marty" wrote in message
...
"Jeff Maass" wrote in message
...
Go and read this BPL related press release:




http://www.uplc.org/?cbr_v=dcb&nt=tr...nten tbrowser


Pay particular attention to paragraph three!

Several people I've heard from are also emailing their comments on
this
release to the
email contact address included in this press release. We expect that
she
should have
a pretty full email box come Monday morning!

73,

Jeff Maass K8ND

Being a non-US amateur this really doesn't concern me, but after reading
the
media release I couldn't resist having may say on her comments about
amateurs! My reply to her is copied below.

Cheers

Martin, VK2UMJ
----------------------

Dear Ms Patterson

Whilst I am not a US citizen and so the current issue of BPL in the USA
does
not concern me, I am what you incorrectly referred to in your media
release
as a"armchair amateurs that still use vacuum tube transmitters" and as
such,
I feel an apology from you to all amateurs, worldwide, is warranted.

Firstly, it is obvious that you are merely an "armchair media officer"
that
has absolutely no idea or concept of what amateur radio is, what
equipment
we use, and what knowledge we have. Your comments are defamatory to the
entire hobby, worldwide, and are proof that the UPLC hav absolutely no
interests other than their own profit margin. It seems that 'truth' is
a
concept that is lost on people such as yourself.

The level of your own technical inadequacy is further proven by your
comment
in the release: "Moreover, these systems will incorporate adaptive
interference mitigation capabilities that will effectively remedy any
interference that might result to fixed and mobile operations in the
High
Frequency (HF) band (1.7-80 MHz).". Elementary school level research
will
tell you that the High Frequency (HF) band actually only covers from 3.0
MHz
to 30 MHz, so again your own "armchair media officers that still use
kindergarten research material" have shown their level of incompetence.

Whilst I do not believe you are mature enough to admit your errors and
apologise to the international amateur radio community for your
misguided
and inaccurate stereotyping, I can only hope that those in power will
see
your media release for the inaccurate, defamatory and poorly reasearched
garbage that it is.

Yours most disrespectfully

Martin Howells
Australian Amateur Station VK2UMJ