On Aug 16, 12:03 am, John Smith I wrote:
Geoffrey S. Mendelson wrote:

...

It was "your" choice, Google and their BPL, or Ham radio.
Which did you decide?

Geoff.

When the sword challenged the rock, the sword won. When the gun
challenged the sword, the gun won. When the automobile challenged the
horse, the auto won. When the washing machine challenged the washboard,
the machine won. When tubes challenged the spark-gap xmitter, the tube
won. When penicillin challenged herbs, penicillin won. When the birth
control pill challenged the condom, the pill won.

Now the internet challenges code tapping amateurs ...

When my henry 2k classic and yagi pointed at the power line challenges
BPL...
Hummmm, this could get ugly... No matter what mode I use. BPL is a two
lane highway. I should be as much of a pest them to them, as them to
me..
Two weeks of me, and I'll have the BPL/power company speaking in
tongues if
they ever decide to install that mess around here.
MK

wrote:

...
When my henry 2k classic and yagi pointed at the power line challenges
BPL...
Hummmm, this could get ugly... No matter what mode I use. BPL is a two
lane highway. I should be as much of a pest them to them, as them to
me..
Two weeks of me, and I'll have the BPL/power company speaking in
tongues if
they ever decide to install that mess around here.
MK


You just don't get the power of digital do you? Or, the laws which will
come ... however, confiscation of that ancient and moth ridden amp and
the fine which will be imposed will be something sane men will wish to
avoid ... I have a 5KW (never run over a calif kilo of input though :-)
)russian amp, its' last days are in sight :-(

JS

On Aug 16, 9:21 am, John Smith I wrote:


You just don't get the power of digital do you? Or, the laws which will
come ... however, confiscation of that ancient and moth ridden amp and
the fine which will be imposed will be something sane men will wish to
avoid ... I have a 5KW (never run over a calif kilo of input though :-)
)russian amp, its' last days are in sight :-(

JS

How would I get fined for pointing my antenna to Europe? It legal for
me to point my antenna to Europe, run an amp, and talk all day if
I want to.
I don't run 5 KW amps, calif kilo's, or other illegal activities as
you
admit to doing. So I would expect you to get a fine before I would.
BTW, the amp is an 81 model. Yes, fairly ancient, but it has no
moths living in it. As Mike points out, I probably wouldn't even need
it to keep BPL on hold. My amp will only do about 1400w max, so
I have no fear of breaking any power level rules.
Just my 100w radio into the yagi, aimed at Europe would probably
do the job.
I have this vision in my mind of a bunch of BPL techs jabbering
away like the guy in the movie "Cape Fear" as he's drowning
in the river.. Abadabajumbalikearedoka, aubadbababababdbaba.
LOL...Kills me to ponder the scenario..
So while you are moaning and groaning about the problem, I will
be taking care of it myself in an orderly military manner.
Any problems they have will be due to their own shoddy system
design and line leakage which is a two way street I remind..
Not my gear. So they won't have a leg to stand on if they or even
you complain to the FCC.
MK

wrote:

...

Well, in my neighborhood/city, you could not get into any trouble. All
lines are underground. What you cite is a moot point.

Except for exceeding safe rf levels, I cannot see a problem.

Anyway, BPL is best suited for remote areas (your neighbor is over in
the next 40 acres), the new 700Mhz would be far more suited to towns/cities.

Isn't the real excitement watching this new technology develop, with
solutions found "on the fly?"

JS

On Aug 16, 10:47 am, John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

...

Well, in my neighborhood/city, you could not get into any trouble. All
lines are underground. What you cite is a moot point.

But if thats the case, they would probably not be much of an issue to
me as far as trashing my rcvr.


Except for exceeding safe rf levels, I cannot see a problem.

No worries there...

Anyway, BPL is best suited for remote areas (your neighbor is over in
the next 40 acres), the new 700Mhz would be far more suited to towns/cities.

I don't think it's very well suited there either, if using overhead
lines.
I have property in a remote area of OK. on Lake Eufaula, and of
course,
I run a station there. That's my "antenna farm"..lol..
I've got antennas strung through the trees. I'm gonna plant low band
beverages there this fall if I can gather up enough inertia and wire.
And all the power lines in that general area are overhead.
I'll make remote area BPL techs bark at the moon just as easily
there, as here in big H. And the problem would likely rear it's ugly
head quicker there, as overall the noise level is lower there vs
big H, being I'm out in the boonies. They could have that mess miles
away and I might hear it. But I have lines nearby too, as most do
out there.


Isn't the real excitement watching this new technology develop, with
solutions found "on the fly?"

Not really. I've seen so much new technology develop in the past 50
years, I think I've become uncomfortably numb. It really doesn't
excite
me too much. I'd just as soon walk around around in the woods and
see if I can count all my trees.. :/
BPL is not really new technology anyway. Seems to me Japan and
Germany already tried and ditched it as unpractical. It's been around
a while.
MK

wrote:

Yeah, the image you attempted to paint in my mind of a toothless old
"HF-RF-Terrorist" with a measly KW+ amp doing any sort of meaningful
disruption of internet communications is, to say the least, highly comic
.... however, you might succeed in enraging your close neighbors into
killing you.

Regards,
JS

On Aug 16, 2:41 pm, John Smith I wrote:
wrote:

Yeah, the image you attempted to paint in my mind of a toothless old
"HF-RF-Terrorist" with a measly KW+ amp doing any sort of meaningful
disruption of internet communications is, to say the least, highly comic
... however, you might succeed in enraging your close neighbors into
killing you.

Regards,
JS

I've been running that station for years with no problems to the
neighbors. Any other ignorant comments?
BTW, you'll be thinking toothless if I ever run across you in
person. It will take great restraint for me not to beat you half
to death. I can't stand a smartass, and you are a primetime
smartass. Smartasses don't last very long around me, and
I still have all my teeth to prove it.
MK

wrote:

How would I get fined for pointing my antenna to Europe? It legal for
me to point my antenna to Europe, run an amp, and talk all day if
I want to. . .
. . .
So while you are moaning and groaning about the problem, I will
be taking care of it myself in an orderly military manner.
Any problems they have will be due to their own shoddy system
design and line leakage which is a two way street I remind..
Not my gear. So they won't have a leg to stand on if they or even
you complain to the FCC.

Do you really seriously believe that if your amateur operation was
causing a huge company to lose money that the FCC or any other
government entity would take your side?

Boy, have I got news for you!

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote in
:

wrote:

How would I get fined for pointing my antenna to Europe? It legal for
me to point my antenna to Europe, run an amp, and talk all day if
I want to. . .
. . .
So while you are moaning and groaning about the problem, I will
be taking care of it myself in an orderly military manner.
Any problems they have will be due to their own shoddy system
design and line leakage which is a two way street I remind..
Not my gear. So they won't have a leg to stand on if they or even
you complain to the FCC.

Do you really seriously believe that if your amateur operation was
causing a huge company to lose money that the FCC or any other
government entity would take your side?

Boy, have I got news for you!

Yes Roy, it is incredibly naive! Just another of the hundreds of false
reasons why 'BPL won't affect me'.

I don't know of the situation in the US, but in Australia, a licence to
transmit on a given frequency does not override another law that in a
very general way prohibits interfering with a telecommunications carriage
service.

So, in Australia, it may be that no new legislation is needed to silence
hams who disrupt a BPL system (interfere with a telecommunications
carriage service).

Some of us continue to work on objective measurement of ambient noise
levels and BPL emissions to document to issue, and the risk to BPL
deployments if they are held to lower emissions than they would like.

Right now I am working on documentation of a series of measurements made
prior to BPL deployment in Sydney. Another series will be made after
deployment, and the measurements by an EMC test house and the WIA will be
considered by the carrier, the regulator, and the relevant Australian
standards committee in a more cooperative environment than seems to exist
in some jurisdictions.

Interestingly, the EMC test houses invariably use equipment that is not
capable of measuring ambient noise levels on HF, they are just not
sufficiently sensitive.

This is a worry, especially when rumour has it that ITU-R is working on a
revision of P.372-8 'Radio Noise' that is likely to see an increase in
expected ambient noise levels on HF. The inevitable creep of spectrum
pollution. As part of our study of the site in Sydney, we will be trying
to justify exclusion of the carrier's noisy SMPS on their PayTV equipment
from determination of the ambient noise levels.

OTOH, we have used a Buddipole and FSM to make measurements of ambient
noise levels that are not invalidated by instrument noise. An article
characterising the Buddipole for use with FSM is at
http://www.vk1od.net/buddipole/index.htm .

The fact remains that we hams do not well understand our operating
environment, and sadly, seem to have little interest in it.

Oh well, there will probably be more development of simulators for the HF
experience in the future!

Owen

On Aug 16, 8:02 pm, Owen Duffy wrote:


Yes Roy, it is incredibly naive! Just another of the hundreds of false
reasons why 'BPL won't affect me'.

That statement doesn't make sense. What would me transmitting on
my legal licensed frequencies have to do with BPL effecting me or
not?
If BPL is in this area, it's going to effect me whether I transmit or
not,
if it trashes my receiver.
It's not naive. I just don't care what they think. I think it's a
lousy
system, they approved it, and now they are going to have to live
with the problems that are sure to come up. I'm not going to be
changing my operation any time soon.



I don't know of the situation in the US, but in Australia, a licence to
transmit on a given frequency does not override another law that in a
very general way prohibits interfering with a telecommunications carriage
service.

That would be all well and good if they used a single frequencies one
could
avoid... The way I understand it, I stand a good chance of trashing
them
no matter what frequency I'm on.
If they are worried about interference to a carriage system, they
should
not place it in the same spectrum with another existing service when
using power lines, or any other type of leaky or non shielded wiring.
What about their interference to HF radio users? Not all are hams.
Some are commercial users, such as Houston Universal Radio, which
supplies radio services for commercial aircraft. I guess they will
have to shut
down also.. I'm sorry.. I don't buy it.. It's a lousy system and it's
not my fault that it is lousy. Why should amateurs pay for this
mistake
in planning?




The fact remains that we hams do not well understand our operating
environment, and sadly, seem to have little interest in it.

How do you come to this conclusion?
Here in the U.S., according to most all I read, it's up to the
unlicensed
emitter to make sure they do not cause interference to licensed
stations.

http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fcc...s_08132003.htm
http://www.ieee.org/organizations/pe...p/pesview.html
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/pl.../BPL_paper.pdf
https://www.arrl.org/forms/fdefense/
Yes, that's right. The ARRL is suing the FCC over this.
I agree with that decision 100%.

I intend to hold them to that. Being an unlicensed emitter, I think
they
should have to accept any interference that comes their way.
And not all will be hams.. What if they decide to run BPL near
Houston Hobby airport where Universal Radio is located.
Do you think they will choose BPL over commercial aircraft
comms?
I doubt it.. I don't think amateur stations should be considered
any differently, being we are licensed stations.

Myself, I think the FCC should be horsewhipped for their
performance in deciding the BPL issues.
They choose to ignore valid test data, and go with who has
the money to spend.
This is why I really could care less what they have to say to
me about any operating I might do. I'll sit right on my front porch
and tell them to bite me if they show up to complain.
They promoted the flawed technology. I had nothing to do with
it. And I have a legal right to operate on any of my assigned
frequencies without undo or unwarranted restrictions.
Imposing "quiet hours" will not help. Lowering my power
will probably not help too much if I'm using gain antennas
pointed at the offending lines, and there is no way to
avoid that if I want to work anywhere to the east.


Oh well, there will probably be more development of simulators for the HF
experience in the future!

And there are probably people that would enjoy such a thing.. : (
MK