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