"Dave Platt" wrote in message
...
In article flFxc.1843$2i5.155@attbi_s52, AK wrote:

Great. If BPL is unworkable, let it fail in the marketplace.

That's one of those nonsense comments that sounds good, but doesn't work.
Once "the marketplace" gets tested, amateur radio and most of the other
users of HF and MF radio reception will be out of business - never to
bounce
back once destroyed. Meanwhile, BPL will be "workable" for those areas
that
never had good cable access and where people were too cheap to use
satellite
or telephone alternatives. BPL isn't "unworkable" - it's the
"unreasonable"
sacrifices that must be made to allow nationwide radio spectrum
disruption
for some trivial gain to a few people and a few big businesses.

There's an interesting analogy to this situation playing out in the
airwaves right now. My understanding of this situation is as follows
(and may be a bit incorrect).

Some years ago, the FCC decided to allow a company which I believe was
called Fleet Telecommunications to set up some digital-packet-oriented
communication on a set of frequencies in the 800 MHz range. These
frequencies were located quite close to the 800 MHz narrow-band FM
channels allocated to publics-safety ground (trunked police and fire
systems, etc.).

There was concern expressed at the time that these digital channels
might cause interference with the existing analog channels
(intermodulation and receiver desensing, I think). The FCC agreed to
allow the allocations, on the condition that the digital operator
ensure that interference to existing allocations would not occur or
would be abated.

Subsequently (I'm hazy on the details) Fleet either went out of
business or was bought up... in either case, Nextel ended up as the
owner of these 800 MHz digital allocations. Nextel has used them as
the basis of much of its current-generation cellphone system.

The result: significant, and sometimes very severe, interference to
public-safety radio operations. There have been numerous reports of
police and firefighters being unable to use their radios successfully,
when in proximity to Nextel cellular sites. This has resulted in very
real danger to life-and-limb for police officers and firefighters.

Nextel has taken some steps to abate specific instances of this
(reducing power) when it's called to their attention, but the problem
remains.

There's a whole massive brouhaha taking place now, about "rebanding"
the 800 MHz spectrum. This will probably involve consolidating the
public-safety frequencies (requiring modification or replacement of
much equipment - Nextel has offered to pay $billions to do this but
there's concern that it'll cost twice that much), and moving at least
some of Nextel's cellular allocations upwards to a higher frequency
band. Nextel wants a big block of spectrum space in compensation,
while other companies claim that the FCC has no legal authority to
simply hand over that space to Nextel and that the law requires the
spectrum to be auctioned to the highest bidder. No matter what the
FCC decides to do, it's likely to end up being challenged in Federal
court and delayed for years.

It's a horrible mess. Some claim that the FCC *could* have acted, on
its own authority, to order Nextel to shut down operations in the
interleaved bands, because their system is apparently violating the
"we will not cause interference to other licensed operations" clauses
which were part of the original Fleet allocation grant. The FCC has
apparently asserted that it doesn't have authority to act on its own
in the absence of a formal legal complaint from a public-safety radio
organization... and no city or county or state has been willing to
file such a complaint (perhaps because the cost of pursuing it
against a deep-pockets company like Nextel would be very high indeed).

I agree that if BPL is rolled out en mass, it _is_ likely to cause
serious interference with HF operations (amateur and otherwise), and
that the momentum of "Hey, we've invested billions to field BPL, you
can't just shut us down" is likely to override the original "No, there
won't be interference" promised.

That's real interesting about Nextel. My experience with the 800 MHz bands
(LTR trunking systems) ended before digital cell phones existed, but I can
certainly believe that frequency spreading must cause some com channel
interference if you are near the transmitter site. Well, anyone who really
believes that the FCC will mitigate interference to amateur radio that is
caused by big-lobbying power companies should also believe in "temporary
taxes" and Santa Clause.

AK

In article ,
-=jd=- wrote:

You lost me there - if a public safety radio org (or anyone else for that
matter) files a formal complaint with the FCC, does the FCC bill the
complainant for any subsequent investigation and/or enforcement expenses?

The FCC's likely to look to the complaining, and responding, parties
to present evidence and research and expert testimony about the issue,
I believe. The big communications companies can afford to throw large
amounts of money at their side of the issue, churning up large amounts
of paperwork, studies, and so forth. In order to hope to win the
case, the public-safety organization would have to try to refute these
studies and reports-from-experts with their own. I suspect it'd run
into a lot of money.

--
Dave Platt AE6EO
Hosting the Jade Warrior home page: http://www.radagast.org/jade-warrior
I do _not_ wish to receive unsolicited commercial email, and I will
boycott any company which has the gall to send me such ads!

"AK" wrote in message
news:_RIxc.24979$Sw.12360@attbi_s51...

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Stopping BPL is simple. It's a political numbers game. Unfortunately,
there's more potential customers for high speed internet access than
there
are SW hobbyists. I'm sure you've noticed that no Democrat is taking an
anti-BPL stance. BPL has already been approved in a couple of areas.

Or, just maybe, the politicans expect BPL to fail or succeed on it's own
merits. If it fails on it's own, then nobody gets the blame for keeping
it
away from the customers.

I see, Frank. You are just a might-&-money makes right sort of guy.

Well, as scurrilous libel goes, that's a step up from toxic waste dumper,
but you've missed the mark again. I was making a democracy arguement. The
voters who want high speed access vastly outnumber the voters who are radio
hobbyists. If BPL can actually deliver on it's big promises, radio
hobbyists will have slim clout in Washington. Being a radio hobbyist isn't
a God given right, or a natural right, or even a constitutional right.

But I think there's more to the democratic free choice arguement. What if
BPL is really a goofy idea which won't work? What's the gain for any
politician to block a popular, yet doomed approach? His opponent will grab
the the glittering promises that the BPL folk are making, and use those
promises to take votes from the "anti-BPL choice" candidate. Don't think
the voters really know the difference.

I see two possible scenerios:

1) BPL works as promised. It delivers high speed internet access to
millions of users at a competitive price. Since cable, DSL, microwave and
sattelite providers also have to compete with the BPL providers, every user
of high speed access benefits from BPL. Thousands of radio hobbyists lose.
Neither the Democrats nor Republicans choose the thousands of hobbyists over
the millions of internet users.

2) BPL flops. It can't provide adequate bandwidth for more than a small
number of users. The small number of users can't make up the costs of the
system and BPL goes the way of the personal jet pack. Politicians who might
have opposed "system choice" before it proved itself unworkable come out
smelling like a rose.


Maybe if
the FCC will just authorize all U.S. hams to run 10KW on MF and HF
frequencies, and give us full immunity to any interference claims, amateur
radio can co-exist with BPL.

ak



Hmmm. Do you think radio amateurs have enough friends in Washington to get
anything like that? Or maybe, if amateur radio interferes with a BPL system
which benefits millions, the FCC will restrict amateur radio to protect BPL?

But, if you're convinced BPL is workable and won't flop, let me suggest you
join the dark side and invest in BPL. Dump your entire networth into BPL.
Borrow more and toss that in too! Rewards go to those the bold who see the
truth, while timid fellows such as myself stand on the sidelines. Thanks to
your clear foresight, you'll soon be able to buy all the accouterments of
capitalism. Buy a diamond handle cane. Buy that Top Hat you've always
wanted. Buy a hand-made Isotta-Fraschini touring car with leopard skin
upholstery and gold plated hardware. Don't forget to buy a chauffeur!!
You'll forget about SW in no time!

http://www.prospectstreet.com/portfolio_listing.htm

Oh wait. Manassas dumped Prospect Street. Seems like they could only get
200 workable BPL connections in 6 months.

Nevermind.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"AK" wrote in message
news:flFxc.1843$2i5.155@attbi_s52...


That's one of those nonsense comments that sounds good, but doesn't
work.
Once "the marketplace" gets tested, amateur radio and most of the other
users of HF and MF radio reception will be out of business - never to
bounce
back once destroyed.

NEVER to bounce back? Shortwave radio is that fragile? Must not be much
keeping it going right now.



Meanwhile, BPL will be "workable" for those areas that
never had good cable access and where people were too cheap to use
satellite
or telephone alternatives. BPL isn't "unworkable" - it's the
"unreasonable"
sacrifices that must be made to allow nationwide radio spectrum
disruption
for some trivial gain to a few people and a few big businesses.


I saw an analysis somewhere on the web (didn't mark the URL) that indicates
BPL will not be cheaper the dial-up or various other types of service unless
it is subsidized. Perhaps they plan to increase the electric rates to make
it up?

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Alex" wrote in message
...
FCC Comm. have terms,
half are dem and other half are rep.

Powell will be there for a while.
He has connections.

HERE IS EXACTLY WHAT I THINK OF
FCC CHAIRMAN POWELL AND HIS
ALLEGED " CONNECTIONS "........

he http://www.misternicehands.com/

(after URL loads CLICK anywhere on it....)

On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:28:42 -0400, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:




I saw an analysis somewhere on the web (didn't mark the URL) that indicates
BPL will not be cheaper the dial-up or various other types of service unless
it is subsidized. Perhaps they plan to increase the electric rates to make
it up?

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Actually, they have a better idea than increasing electricity rates.
The highly effusive BPL story that ran in Time Magazine recently said
BPL will bundle internet access with telephone service and
video-on-demand.

We hams got a hell of a fight on our hands.

bob
k5qwg

"Bob Miller" wrote in message
...
On Wed, 9 Jun 2004 16:28:42 -0400, "Dee D. Flint"
wrote:




I saw an analysis somewhere on the web (didn't mark the URL) that
indicates
BPL will not be cheaper the dial-up or various other types of service
unless
it is subsidized. Perhaps they plan to increase the electric rates to
make
it up?

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

Actually, they have a better idea than increasing electricity rates.
The highly effusive BPL story that ran in Time Magazine recently said
BPL will bundle internet access with telephone service and
video-on-demand.

We hams got a hell of a fight on our hands.


Video on demand??? They gotta be outta their pea-pickin' minds.. Where they
gonna get the sort of bandwidth they need to provide all those services?
It's not like they're going to have ADSL type bandwidths available to every
home (and the more homes they connect, the less bandwidth they will have
available for each).. and I have problems at times with Video on Demand with
my ADSL line (supposedly 10 Mbit, but I rarely acheive download speeds
greater than about 400Kbit).

1) DSL in any form on the market today is not capable of 10Mbps. 7.1 is
it at present, and rare. Most DSL in my area is sold as 256/256, the
next step, which just changed here (old was 620/256) in Qwest country,
is 1500/768. Most non-business DSL circuits don't go beyond this.

2) If you are not getting the BW your ISP and local loop provider show
in your Terms of Service agreements, and they have not attempted to
remedy the problem (assuming you complained), you have grounds to
complain to your local PUC. As well as the Better Business Bureau, etc.

This is a decent DSL info link -

http://www.dslreports.com/faq

tom
K0TAR

Brenda Ann Dyer wrote:


Video on demand??? They gotta be outta their pea-pickin' minds.. Where they
gonna get the sort of bandwidth they need to provide all those services?
It's not like they're going to have ADSL type bandwidths available to every
home (and the more homes they connect, the less bandwidth they will have
available for each).. and I have problems at times with Video on Demand with
my ADSL line (supposedly 10 Mbit, but I rarely acheive download speeds
greater than about 400Kbit).

Cecil Moore wrote in message ...
yea right wrote:
Unfortunately, everybody knows that BPL will hinder HF.

Will it hinder coherent CW and PACTOR II?

Fill the gas tank and wine cooler and take an HF mobile rig into a BPL
"test area" and tune around like I did and come to your own
conclusions Cecil. My direct experience with the stuff clearly
indicates the utter destruction of HF radio within large radii
anywhere it's deployed.

Luv the "we need to cooperate . . yadda, yadda, with the power
utilities . . yadda, yadda . ." sugestions. Yeah right: I've also
"interfaced" with a power utility or two in my time on the general
topic of "Broadband RF interference: . . Might as well have tried to
cut "mitigation" deals with Al Queda.

The good news however is that it's basically an artifact technolgy,
it's time will never come. In the meanwhile we have to keep leaning on
the sumbitches so keep shipping monies into the ARRL Spectrum Defense
Fund.

w3rv

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Hmmm. Do you think radio amateurs have enough friends in Washington
to get anything like that?

Nope.

Or maybe, if amateur radio interferes with a BPL system which
benefits millions, the FCC will restrict amateur radio to protect BPL?

I doubt the "benefits millions" bit, but will the FCC restrict amateur radio
if it interferes with big-business political contributors' operations ? Of
course it will.

ak