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

wrote:
. . .
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. . .

Exactly my point. The ARRL can lobby all they want, but until they can
match the "campaign contributions" of the big-money boys, they'll pretty
much be ignored. Money does the talking. If your "legal" operation
interferes with the making of large amounts of money, either your legal
status will be ignored (but you're free to sue the power company if you
want), or the FCC will solve the problem with a regulatory change in
favor of the ones with the money, or a little baksheesh will change
hands for an "earmark" on some obscure congressional bill to make a
special law just for folks like you. That's the way our system works.

Anyone who likes sausage or has respect for the law shouldn't look too
closely at how either is made.

Roy Lewallen, W7EL

Roy Lewallen wrote in
:

....
want), or the FCC will solve the problem with a regulatory change in
favor of the ones with the money, or a little baksheesh will change

A solution in the stroke of a pen.

It is the golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules.

Owen

Owen Duffy wrote:
Roy Lewallen wrote in
:

...
want), or the FCC will solve the problem with a regulatory change in
favor of the ones with the money, or a little baksheesh will change

A solution in the stroke of a pen.

It is the golden rule, he who has the gold makes the rules.


Money is Honey, my little sonny, and a rich man's joke is always funny.

Owen, I prescribe 2 weeks or R and R for you and Roy. Skepticism is
healthy, but a descendence past pessimism into gloom is not healthy.

Beer and chips for everyone, and the floggings will continue until
morale improves. ;^)


- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

Michael Coslo wrote:

...
Owen, I prescribe 2 weeks or R and R for you and Roy. Skepticism is
healthy, but a descendence past pessimism into gloom is not healthy.
...
- 73 de Mike KB3EIA -

I'd say Owen, and especially Roy, are right on. If you must escape
gloom at the price of ignoring truth, how then do you expect anything to
get better. Lady justice might be required to wear a blind fold (these
days she peeks into wallets), Joe Blow public needs to have his/her eyes
wide open!

With the new 700Mhz freqs in the process of "arrangement" so that the
BIG MONEY telcos get 'em and the telcos remain in control of expensive
voice/data lines, and are allowed price control and use control, BPL is
a sure to be attempted as an escape route.

Now you can fight this issue anyway you choose--but the real answer is
to attack the beast in the heart, unfortunately the telcos are still one
particularly ugly, brazen and large dragon! And of course, as Roy
pointed out, these telcos are under the protection of corrupt,
self-serving public servants who oppose the will of their masters (Joe
Blow public.)

Now, run and hide from those fact, or not ...

Regards,
JS

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.
===================================
Here in the UK BPL (or PLC =Power Line Communication as it is called
here) is not an issue since ADSL via telphone line) is sufficiently
developed be it not everywhere at a 2Mbits/sec or higher speed (as yet).

I have followed ARRL's involvment in 'fighting BPL' and noticed they
have tested in/around their HQ a Motorola BPL system that apparently
does NOT interfere with HF comms . Other BPL systems are giving a lot
of problems .
So there seem to be purely technical issues with BPL as well.
Also it seems to be very doubtful that BPL will be viable as a cost
effective HS comms system considering other more viable methods like
fibre or community satellite/high power Wifi systems ,the latter
particularly promising for rural communities.

Here in the north of Scotland HV pylons ( carry trunk fibre optic cable
Frank GM0CSZ / KN6WH