If you value radio, this may be the last and only chance to have your
voice heard to stop BPL from destroying your hobby. The FCC has extended
the comment period for BPL.


Kindly understand that not everyone is convinced that BPL will 'destroy' ham
radio or SWL'ing. I am one of many that disagree with your assessment, and
agree with the prevailing position that BPL is an important technology option
that can co-exist with the 'ham' community, for example.

Ham radio is not licensed as a hobby; it is licensed as a service. When 'hams'
atempt to prevent adoption of new technologies, rather than foster them, then
there are those who debate the value of our spectrum allottments.

Working together with BPL is the best course for ham radio. This will allow the
marketplace to decide if BPL is a viable option, rather than putting the focus
on ham radio as a passe and reactionary group--which is the public perception
in the popular press at this time (for example, the recent WSJ front page
article).

Think about these comments in the context of what has happened so far with BPL.
Then project the most likely scenario moving forward.

73,
Chip N1IR

On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:39:39 +0000, Fractenna wrote:

Working together with BPL is the best course for ham radio.

Unfortunately, everybody knows that BPL will hinder HF. There is no
argument here as all testing shows this. The question is really how much
is acceptable. 5db/m increase in noise floor at 500M nor 9uV/m at 10M of
interference is not acceptably to me on any HF freq. Goodbye QRP,
especially if you live in the sticks! You may never hear distant shortwave
broadcast again unless you live miles from a powerline.

Testing in the united states has not been truthful, utilizing Shoody test
techniques and deception. They even picked a test community with
underground power lines and no nearby amateurs. I'm willing to bet that
all the people are on cable/DBS TV and nobody had a shortwave radio.

BPL is bad and the FCC knows it. So does FEMA, the military and the
coastguard. That is why they have provisions in the regulations for them
(and them only) to restrict BPL away from their facilities. Hams will not
have this protection. Both the British and Germans pulled BPL when field
test revealed the true nature of the interference.

Why wait until it's too late to do anything about. If you wait, you lose.
The WSJ (Wall Street Journal)is there to promote business. BPL is business
and amateur radio is not. I will let others painfully expand about these
politics on many vectors. ;-)

Please, if you value radio, it only takes a few minutes to fill out a FCC
comment.... better safe than sorry.

www.vambo.org/a

Glad you did something on this! I sent mine in (added to yours some);

I recommend that the FCC ask for a technical showing that BPL will
not interfere with other existing communications in these bands
before establishing Rules and Regulations. I also recommend that
the FCC ask for a technical showing signal losses (of BPL) on
distribution grids in a city. These losses are substantial, and can
indicate that BPL works in only very limited cases, making it
basically unusable in urban and suburban areas.


Existing Emergency communications will be hindered to levels
directly responsible for the loss of life, because of a raised
noise floor or excessive leakage in various locations.

There are many technologies that make BPL unnecessary. BPL will
never be able to carry the high bandwidth demands for mass
distribution of video much less the up-and-coming HDTV.


Please do not destroy the foundation of radio communications below
50 MHz for a unproven technology that is suspected of causing
widespread interference.

In Writing, I wish to persuade the FCC from allowing BPL to be
implemented. The destruction or at the least, deterioration of the
shortwave bands is not only a violation of ITU laws that protect
international broadcasters from interference and jamming, it will
be destroying many people's life hobby. Amateur radio will be
reduced to users with high-power amplifiers and large antennas.

Thank you.

"yea right" wrote in message
news
On Tue, 08 Jun 2004 11:39:39 +0000, Fractenna wrote:

Working together with BPL is the best course for ham radio.

Unfortunately, everybody knows that BPL will hinder HF. There is no
argument here as all testing shows this. The question is really how much
is acceptable. 5db/m increase in noise floor at 500M nor 9uV/m at 10M of
interference is not acceptably to me on any HF freq. Goodbye QRP,
especially if you live in the sticks! You may never hear distant shortwave
broadcast again unless you live miles from a powerline.

Testing in the united states has not been truthful, utilizing Shoody test
techniques and deception. They even picked a test community with
underground power lines and no nearby amateurs. I'm willing to bet that
all the people are on cable/DBS TV and nobody had a shortwave radio.

BPL is bad and the FCC knows it. So does FEMA, the military and the
coastguard. That is why they have provisions in the regulations for them
(and them only) to restrict BPL away from their facilities. Hams will not
have this protection. Both the British and Germans pulled BPL when field
test revealed the true nature of the interference.

Why wait until it's too late to do anything about. If you wait, you lose.
The WSJ (Wall Street Journal)is there to promote business. BPL is business
and amateur radio is not. I will let others painfully expand about these
politics on many vectors. ;-)

Please, if you value radio, it only takes a few minutes to fill out a FCC
comment.... better safe than sorry.

www.vambo.org/a

yea right wrote:
Unfortunately, everybody knows that BPL will hinder HF.

Will it hinder coherent CW and PACTOR II?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp



-----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
-----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

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