Jim Hampton wrote:

Since you purport to have a ee degree, you might explain how some signals
held below 300 KHz could possibly serve a number of users (say in a
neighborhood) at 3 megabaud (or higher) rates? My $29.95 per month ADSL
runs from 4,000 kbits to 7,000 kbits per second. I downloaded I.E. 6 at 695
kilobytes per second, so it is not a fluke. Will BPL do as well? BPL isn't
going to be used in the countryside; they want to penetrate cities where the
cost per user will be cheap. The problem is that cable (Roadrunner) and DSL
are running $29.95 per month - oh, DSL is now available (high speed) at
$24.95 per month. Of course, satellite can also supply high-speed Internet
connections. Perhaps BPL can do it for $10.00 per month? LOL

Some folks say BPL should be subsidized for a time to "stimulate
competition".

For what it is worth, Len is correct; the BPL runs from just above the AM
broadcast band (in the U.S.) to around 80 MHz. Even at, say, 1.8 MHz, there
can be considerable radiation.

It should be remembered that there are a number of different BPL
technologies being pushed. There's no one standard. Compare that to
competing systems!

The easiest solution is simply to allow it, but not allow signals any
greater than those currently permitted for unintentional radiators.

IIRC, that's what FCC allowed.

The problem is that the current standards were meant for point-source
individual radiators, like a computer monitor. IOW devices, not
systems.

One of the big problems with BPL is that you can't get far enough away
from it. If my neighbor has a noisy computer monitor, it cannot get any
closer to my ham radio stuff than the property line.

But if even one of my neighbors has BPL, and we're fed off the same
power-company transformer, all of *my* house and service wiring becomes
a BPL radiator, whether I'm a BPL user or not.

If
done, only a small number of amateurs would likely be affected.

That depends on how effective the power lines are as antennas. A noisy
point source device like a computer monitor is not a very good antenna,
and it's normally inside a building, with various things around it that
provide some shielding/attenuation. Aerial power lines are up where
they can do a good job of radiating!

IMHO, one of the big reasons BPL is so new, with no previously-existing
regulations addressing it, is that it used to be that nobody would
dream of even proposing a system using HF on power lines, because they
*knew* FCC would shoot them down big time.

If I recall properly (and anyone is free to correct these numbers), BPL
proponents had argued that BPL, as originally proposed, would only raise the
background noise some 10 dB.

Allegedly. According to their models.

Ten decibels is, of course, 1 Bell, which is a
10 times increase in power (in this case, noise power). That is quite
unacceptable. Period.

To us radio types, yes. But to an administration looking for a silver
bullet, HF radio is a legacy-mode of communications, as opposed to "the
internets"...

I know that a large number of folks would like to reduce testing (not just
Morse) to as close to zero as possible.

Yup. One of the good things about 05-235 is that FCC turned down all
such proposals. No free upgrades. No easier entry level license.

Not this time, anyway.

Did you read the "Amateur Radio in the 21st Century" paper that led to
the second NCVEC proposal? Pretty scary.

My former employer discontinued apprenticeships a while back. Originally,
they were 4 year apprenticeships; later, they became 3 year
apprenticeships - but the 3 year apprenticeship conferred an associates
degree upon graduation. So, the 4 year apprenticeship must have been a
watered-down apprenticeship, right?

Indeed.

I see where one state in this country is now changing its' education system
to take a strong stand against evolution and make some statements
encouraging "intelligent design".

"Creationism in a cheap tuxedo"...

Next thing ya know they'll be burning copies of Inherit The Wind.

Speaking of that associate's degree apprenticeship, they stated that it
includes a lot of electronic theory. I saw the books. I was surprised that
they actually mentioned Norton and Thevenin equivalents, but they were
sorely lacking in much detail. No ac theory (forget complex impedance).
Simply series and parallel dc circuits. No bridges. No Delta Wye
conversions. No multiple dc sources either. Perhaps a maximum of 4
resistors in an extremely simple "circuit".

Good heavens..

Whilst you and others seem intent on reducing testing (I have no problem
with Morse - either for or against), I cannot agree with simplifying the
theory/operating/law sections of the testing. I see other areas of the
country which are similarly intent on watering down much other than amateur
radio.

Because it's 'too hard'

You watch - when the Morse Code test is gone, there will be a flurry of
upgrades and some new licenses, but it won't last. Then there will be
renewed efforts to reduce the written tests still more. And they will
use the same
arguments that were used against the Morse Code tests.

Why, oh why, are we the number 16 nation in the world in broadband
penetration (oh, BPL, right?)? We are far from number one with cell phones.
We are down around number 20 in life expectancy.

There's a bunch of reasons for that:

1) Lots of old infrastructure
2) Low population density
3) Lack of exercise, unhealthy lifestyles, lack of access to routine
medical care (how many people use the ER as their family doctor?)
4) Poverty, ignorance, lack of community
5) Diverse population
6) Misplaced priorities

Yep, better argue against Darwin. All those liberal left-leaning
universities must be the problem. Perhaps we can chase away learned folks
the way Germany did 70 years ago or so. Werner Von Bran sure was an asset
to our country when he left Germany. Maybe we can return the favor and
chase some folks out of this country.

I've already been told here that I should leave, rather than even
suggest that
energy independence might require some hard choices....

I'm beginning to see why some of the hams argue so vehemently. I think it
has something more than just Morse behind it.

BINGO!

For about 30 years I've watched the standards erode, a little at a
time. At each step I was told it was "no big deal", I was an "old head"
and had to "accept change". I was told it was unreasonable to expect
people to
learn stuff like Morse Code or most of what was on the writtens.

Yet the growth in amateur radio was greater under the old standards.
Look how
US ham radio grew in the 1970s, then the 1980s, and finally the 1990s.


Take a look at what is happening. Read some newspapers (best look outside
the U.S. for less-biased reporting). Check some numbers (such as poverty,
Internet penetration, life expectancy). No, we are not in bad shape, but
nowhere near the top where most folks simply *think* we are. Just because
the administration says were are doing well doesn't make it so.

I think a big part of that is due to the export of good jobs, like
manufacturing, out of the USA. Each step is sold to us as "no big
deal", but the overall effect is staggering.

Remember Ross Perot and the "giant sucking sound" over NAFTA? Now we
have CAFTA!

I tried to buy a new power drill today. Just a plain 3/8' chuck VSR
drill with a cord. Try to find one that's not made in China!

Check this out:

http://tinyurl.com/c9txx

You see the leading edge of it because you're in Rochester, a city that
was manufacturing- and technology-heavy. Kodak, Xerox, etc. Plus
educational institutions to feed those industries.

73 de Jim, N2EY