|
Perhaps He WANTS to listen to the short wave bands! Who really gives a
crap about web cast, if he chooses to listen to the radio? I hate to break this to you, but the world does not revolve around the bloody internet! Hi Hoe, Please read my response (on another post), which poses some important questions to him. 73, Chip N1IR |
Hi Hoe,
Fat fingers Joe; apologies. Replace as "Hi Joe," 73, Chip N1IR |
|
Love as usual,
Brian w3rv Hi Brian, I imagine that when 10M comes back, I will be fascinated to do so. I still have the JRC and use it for MF antenna testing on occassion. I do hope that, when this occurs, we in the ham 'fraternity' (a horrible sexist misnomer IMO) will have finally switched to voice-digital modes on HF and away from SSB . Such digital modes are far less sensitive to supposed 'interference'. About time we were 'with it' and don't let the totality of the wireless/telecom revolution pass us by.. 73, Chip N1IR |
"Fractenna"
Thanks for your opinion. As for non- BC SWL'ing, may we presume that the intended transmissions were not made for your information nor benefit? If so, then how is one to presume that eavesdropping from a residence as a form of entertainment... You're one of those brainwashed, Orwellian-fans. You're living down to your well-established reputation as an idiot. It is apparent that you'll not be convinced, so it is a waste of perfectly good bits to argue further. Oh, you ask me to cite references, I did. You big fat jerk. |
"Fractenna"
Thanks for your opinion. As for non- BC SWL'ing, may we presume that the intended transmissions were not made for your information nor benefit? If so, then how is one to presume that eavesdropping from a residence as a form of entertainment... You're one of those brainwashed, Orwellian-fans. You're living down to your well-established reputation as an idiot. It is apparent that you'll not be convinced, so it is a waste of perfectly good bits to argue further. Oh, you ask me to cite references, I did. You big fat jerk. My dear friend, This is not a personal issue; I have faith that you can transcend your tone here and say something that could be helpful in making your point compelling. If the point is compelling, then it certainly would make your case , which would undoubtedly be carefully echoed in the BPL issue. Emotional gut reactions and name calling aren't the way to convince those who make the decisions. I tried; I am sorry I cannot help you unless you help yourself. Best wishes, Chip N1IR |
Hi Old Ed, it's pretty easy, just did it myself, you just need to setup a
message rule.......... -Go to menu Tools/Message Rules/News -On the New News Rule checkoff in the following boxes to setup a new rule: -1) Where the From line contains people -2) Delete it -3) click the Contains People link -type in the name of the offending sender, then Add, then OK -couple more OK's to close all the windows and put the settings into effect (you can repeat the above to add more names too) Have fun, you can add, modify, delete as many rules as you like. The next time you access the group you will not see any *new* posts from that person. 73, John "Old Ed" wrote in message ink.net... But for someone who comes on an amateur radio forum to gloat over the probable destruction of the HF radio spectrum, I'll make an exception. Will someone please tell me how to "killfile" this F***ING STUPID TROLL? I haven't quite figured out how to do it in OE6. (That will also save me from feeding this Troll, which I'm afraid I just did.) |
"Fractenna" wrote in message ... If you don't understand the ultimate utility of the HF spectrum then rolls eyes... SWL includes a whole world more than just broadcasting. Your ignorance, or at least a very poor assumption, is showing. And BCB... Thanks for your opinion. Firsty, I am not the FCC. This issue was duly considered and carefully thought through, so please don't use me as a proxy: they know more about the SW BCB than me. Second, I asked you to educate me: not because I'm clueless, but because I wanted to give you the benefit of perhaps mentioning an aspect of this, that is (allegedly) beyond the extant solutions and prescribed remedies of Part 15. Because the "extant solutions" will not work in the real world. Why, we could save a lot of money and trouble if the product emission requirements of Part 15 were eliminated. Then, the general population could deal with interference problems on a "case-by-case" basis; if you were experiencing an interference problem, all you would have to do is locate the source and invoke the general "shall not cause degradation to licensed services" clause, and the offending source would be quickly technically fixed or permanently shut down. Anybody who thinks this is practical must have a mental age of about 7 (and pardon me if I'm insulting 7-year-olds). Ed wb6wsn |
Hrm...
Anyone else see the callsign in my post? Fracky here doesn't see it. (It's blatantly obvious if you know where to look.) Yes, I drive truck, by choice. I own two of them, as a matter of fact. I paid taxes on over $150K last year. I'm a successful independent business man. How'd you do last year? Prior to that, I was a regional tech support manager for Bay Networks. I was making a 6-figure salary there, too. Got burned out and decided to do something a bit less stressful. It works for me. Prior to that I taught electronics at a trade school in Salt Lake City, UT. Prior to that I was enlisted in the USMC, where I was a networking technician, small computer systems technician, and was stationed with 1st MarDiv G-6 on mainside, MCB Camp Pendelton, and 11th Marines on Las Pulgas, Camp Pendelton. Who's your friend, anyway? Doug, N8WWM? George, WA3MOJ? Known trolls in rec.radio.cb. CB is required for my job, so there's that. I also have HF and VHF gear in the truck, and am licensed to use it all. Since when is someone's choice of employment indicative of their intelligence or abilities in other fields? Look up the definition of Amateur in the dictionary, Fracky. As for your implied insult, sugar-coated as it was, it didn't hit home. Try again, Trollboi. And if you'd ever care to supply that performance data that I asked for oh, so many years ago, I'd still be interested in seeing it. I'd like gain figures, and directivity figures of your 10M fractal against a balun fed 10M dipole oriented in the same direction at the same height above ground, on the same frequency. -SSB Fractenna wrote: 1. I ID every time I post. If you can't figure it out, it goes to show A friend says you are a truckdriver in Michigan. Is this true? If so, it is important to know your perspective given your comments. Mind you, truckdriving is a noble and important job--but says nothing about a knowledge base on antenna technologies; BPL; and so on. Oh well, nice to beep ya! 10-4 there good buddy! Chip N1IR |
Why, we could save a lot of money and trouble if the product emission
requirements of Part 15 were eliminated. Anybody who thinks this is practical must have a mental age of about 7 (and pardon me if I'm insulting 7-year-olds). Ed wb6wsn Surely no one is suggesting this, Ed. 73, Chip N1IR |
Let's pick this one apart....
Fractenna wrote: 1. I ID every time I post. If you can't figure it out, it goes to show your lack of attention to detail. Hmmm...here's what I believe to be relevant; this knowledge may be incomplete or wrong. Kindly correct? Apologies if wrong. No slight meant in any way. Still don't know your proper callsign..assuming you have one. You're named Chris. That's correct You operate out of Michigan. Livingston.You live in the next town over (Howell). Yep. Most of the time you drive big rigs down the southern corridor into Nashville and beyond. That information is a few years old. I run a regional route from Illinois over to Mass, down to VA. You stop and eat often in E-Town Kentucky and don't like Po-Folks restaurant. You eat at Cracker Barrel, but they all look the same...same fare. I have nothing against Po-Folks. I only rarely stopped in E-Town. I like Cracker Barrel, but much prefer Outback or Chilis. Hard to get a big-rig into either of those during business hours, so I usually eat at the truckstops. Nope. Wrong there. Divorced? Two kids? Divorced. No kids. Me-a-n fisherman. Fish fear you. Prefer big mouth bass. Nope. Catfish and Trout. No time for it since I started my new business, though. That's one of the things I miss. Sounds cool! Let me know the next time you're out fishin in KY! That's not going to happen any time soon. No time, and no desire to get within 100 yards of you. At least not until you can show you're man enough to provide the data I requested on your fractal antennae. Even then, I'm not sure I want that much to do with you. 73, Chip N1IR Oh, and I am licensed. In fact I went from 22 years on just CB to Extra in 6 months, without having to study anything except the Code. I'm dyslexic, so I had quite the time with that. Took me three tries to pass the code, but I did it, without a waiver. So just take the "you're not smart enough to have an intelligent conversation about antennas" attitude and point it elsewhere. -SSB |
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 23:08:58 -0700, Wes Stewart
wrote: If these folks haven't bothered to register before and educate themselves on the issues, why should they be voting? Hi Wes, The HAVE. The problem is we've had a spate of "volunteer" groups who've pre-screened some registrants and those forms NEVER making it into the office. Another problem is that we have had a FLOOD of new registrants this summer (100,000+) in this county, and that has choked the system such that when they go to check their status, their form may have not cleared the bottleneck, and the office suggests if there is any doubt they should apply again. At our first stop, quite a few have been Troops and the families of Troops and I suppose they've been too busy out of country (or on their way) to read the paper. The problem of getting Absentee Ballots has been widely reported in the Army Times (they had offered solutions last summer, Congress has had problems fulfilling those solutions for some reason). To All, Anyway, it is now national law that any registered voter must be given a ballot even if their name does not appear on the Voter's Roll. If any of you is denied a ballot because they claim you do not appear on the Roll, they cannot deny you a "Provisional Ballot" (this name may vary by state). If they stonewall you claiming they "never" heard of such a thing, then you simply go to another Polling Station and make the same demand (you do not have to be at "your" Polling Station to vote this way). If your state varies from this significantly, then you should move out of Florida. When you vote "Provisional Ballot" be prepared to have it placed into a security envelope, where you will provide your name, signature, place of residence such that when your name does appear on the Roll that it can be reconciled and the vote tallied. 73's Richard Clark, KB7QHC |
Fractenna wrote: Genuinely--please correct my lack of knowledge on this: what is the value of SW BCB in an era of web cast? 73, Chip N1IR In a wartime situation, the internet may, and probably will, be down. The knowledge and expertise of people who can both receive and transmit on HF will be invaluable in such situations. If BPL is trashing the bands, it will make it that much more difficult to receive HF broadcasts, and HF Amateur transmissions, which will tend to get people away from HF. They won't want to put up with the interference. Bad idea. -SSB |
I'd
like gain figures, and directivity figures of your 10M fractal against a balun fed 10M dipole oriented in the same direction at the same height above ground,... Two element 10M FQY= 4dBd compared to such a dipole; F/B about 20 dB at that gain. Last version had bandwidth of 1.5 MHz for 2:1 SWR. You can see a professional 3 el version for a higher frequency on the slideshow gif on www.fractenna.com. From what I've seen, about 50 science fairs have had these quads over the years. Always happy to help those who are polite and have legitimate interests, such as students. Chris, when someone pays you a compliment, don't take it as an insult to your intelligence. Truck driving is AOK with me; I have relatives out your way who drive trucks. So, when are we goin' fishin'? 73, Chip N1IR |
Who's your friend, anyway? Doug, N8WWM? George, WA3MOJ? Known trolls
in rec.radio.cb. Don't know who these folks are. 73, Chip N1IR |
If BPL is trashing the bands, it will make it that much more difficult
to receive HF broadcasts, and HF Amateur transmissions, which will tend to get people away from HF. They won't want to put up with the interference. Bad idea. -SSB How can you be on CB and say that no one puts up with interference? Also, the actual number of hams affected is probably very small, so the point is interesting but probably better posed in the context of :"if we don't get novices again, with no code privileges, then..." 73, Chip N1IR. |
Buuuut you still don't answer the question... Didn't think you would,
but had to ask anyway. -SSB Fractenna wrote: Who's your friend, anyway? Doug, N8WWM? George, WA3MOJ? Known trolls in rec.radio.cb. Don't know who these folks are. 73, Chip N1IR |
"Fractenna" wrote in message ... If you don't understand the ultimate utility of the HF spectrum then rolls eyes... SWL includes a whole world more than just broadcasting. Your ignorance, or at least a very poor assumption, is showing. And BCB... Thanks for your opinion. Firsty, I am not the FCC. This issue was duly considered and carefully thought through, so please don't use me as a proxy: they know more about the SW BCB than me. With the caveat that I think the FCC is about the most open example of our Federal government, I have to point out that "due consideration" is a real hoot. Oh sure, issues move along in their majestic dance through the FCC's bureaucracy, but, after all the technical discussion has been input, there's a big, heavy political thumb on the scales of justice. Every FCC Commissioner is a political appointee, and they are all professional administrators, without a trace of experience in electromagnetics or communications theory. Each Commissioner has his own philosophy that he tries to bend the FCC toward, with top-down influence and an eye toward his next career step. To think that hot-button political issues (internet access for everyone) and special interests (what politician doesn't need money, if only to periodically fund his re-election) don't guide the technical issues is to be willfully naive. Shocking as this may be, Fractenna (and my dog) just might know more about some aspects of electromagnetics than one or more of the FCC Commissioners. OTOH, FCC Commissioners have more friends, dress better, get more sex, and are far more wealthy and articulate than either. Ed wb6wsn |
Ouch. Even I wasn't going to be THAT succinct..
-SSB Ed Price wrote: With the caveat that I think the FCC is about the most open example of our Federal government, I have to point out that "due consideration" is a real hoot. Oh sure, issues move along in their majestic dance through the FCC's bureaucracy, but, after all the technical discussion has been input, there's a big, heavy political thumb on the scales of justice. Every FCC Commissioner is a political appointee, and they are all professional administrators, without a trace of experience in electromagnetics or communications theory. Each Commissioner has his own philosophy that he tries to bend the FCC toward, with top-down influence and an eye toward his next career step. To think that hot-button political issues (internet access for everyone) and special interests (what politician doesn't need money, if only to periodically fund his re-election) don't guide the technical issues is to be willfully naive. Shocking as this may be, Fractenna (and my dog) just might know more about some aspects of electromagnetics than one or more of the FCC Commissioners. OTOH, FCC Commissioners have more friends, dress better, get more sex, and are far more wealthy and articulate than either. Ed wb6wsn |
FCC Commissioners have more friends, dress better,...
are far more wealthy and articulate than either. Ed wb6wsn Mr. Powell is one bright guy, IMO. He, an attorney, has dozens of engineers and scientists at his call, some of the very best in the country one may presume. He has great respect for radio amateurs and our issues, also my opinion. You are right that he dresses better than me, at least for daily fare. I think he knows what he's doing. 73, Chip N1IR |
Who's your friend, anyway? Doug, N8WWM? George, WA3MOJ? Known trolls
in rec.radio.cb. Don't know who these folks are. 73, Chip N1IR It's not someone you know. It's someone I know. That's your answer. Don't be paranoid:-). 73, Chip N1IR |
Fractenna wrote: If BPL is trashing the bands, it will make it that much more difficult to receive HF broadcasts, and HF Amateur transmissions, which will tend to get people away from HF. They won't want to put up with the interference. Bad idea. -SSB How can you be on CB and say that no one puts up with interference? Also, the actual number of hams affected is probably very small, so the point is interesting but probably better posed in the context of :"if we don't get novices again, with no code privileges, then..." 73, Chip N1IR. CB is intended for short range communications, under 120 miles. Rarely will a legal station be able to transmit much more than 20 miles, when the hash and trash aren't throwing their deadkeys and noise toys. Completely different subject. Chip, you probably haven't been out driving around in the areas they were testing BPL, while trying to work a net. You can hear, literally, the "motorboating" from BPL interference 40-50 miles away from a test area. By the time you're within 10 miles of a test area, the noise from the BPL (different from magnesium lights and other urban noise sources) is close to 20db over S9.. making working the net nigh-on impossible. We're talking, minimum, a 100 mile radius around a BPL test site where the interference from BPL makes Amateur HF communications, at a minimum, extremely difficult, and at worst, impossible. Now, mind you, this is receiving from a "compromise" antenna. I've tried switching types from my 40-foot, ICOM AH-4, tuned looped longwire, to Hustler "dummy loads", to Hamstick whips, to Iron Horse whips, to 102" SS whips tuned with LDG tuners, on the 10, 20, 40, 75, and 80 meter bands. ALL of them were affected to varying degrees, but none were affected so little as to make communications in these areas possible. So your contextual assumptions do not apply to this situation in the least. IMHO, BPL is a bad for the Amateur community, and for emergency communications in general. The interference on CB is a completely different story. -SSB |
Wes Stewart wrote:
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:11:22 GMT, Richard Clark wrote: |(1200 new registered voters in 3 days) If these folks haven't bothered to register before and educate themselves on the issues, why should they be voting? As a BTW, the citizens of Arizona have the right to initiate law via the ballot. (There are a couple of propositions on the ballot to take away this right, politicians not wanting any meddling by the common folk, doncha ya know.) One of these initiative propositions would require a simple proof of citizenship when you register and when you show up at the polls. The usual suspects, i.e., the newspapers, the Hispanic "activists", my gerrymandered-into-office Hispanic congressman, etc. are needless to say suffering from severe panty bunching over this. They claim that there has never been any instance of non-citizens, or those ineligible, registering or voting. The evening news just reported that 45 residents of the county lock-up, felons all, were just registered to vote. Some of them several times. I guess that's good, huh? What we need around here (California) is a law that says you have to prove you're alive when you vote. Dead people always seem to find their way to the polling booth on election day in Northern California. 73, Tom Donaly, KA6RUH |
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message ... Ed Price wrote: "Fractenna" wrote in message ... SNIP 3) The FCC has taken careful and measured steps to assure that US amateurs remain with the enjoyment of the HF bands, given the sharing of spectrum with BPL. 4)It is the very best scenario for all involved. That is definitely worth gloating over. Wishing you the best, Chip N1IR The "very best solution" would be to allow the utilities to use their extensive system of power poles to string a fiberoptic cable to residences (either direct, or maybe the last half-mile as an RF node). If the power companies had spent their lobbying and legal money on installing this base, a lot of people would now have high-speed net connections. Ed, if my understanding is correct, the power companies will indeed be stringing fiber optic cables. There will be one going right by your house if you are blessed to live in an bpl blessed neighborhood. THe infrastructure must be built. I think there is an impression that the power companies are just going to alligator clip a bpl signal on the lines at the generating plant. Power lines are fair at delivering low frequency and high power. At HF they aren't so hot. So while you have the leaky, degraded signal with the dubious convenience of being placed from the HV lines to the other side of your line transformer (and let's just hope that has been worked out to be safe) wouldn't it just make more sense to get the fast signal from the proper source? Going right by your house.... BPL is the industry equivalent of putting bicycle tires on a top fuel dragster. A triumph of politics over technology. - Mike KB3EIA - I agree that the power companies can't couple to their intermediate distribution lines, since coupling across the next set of step-down transformers is poor. I was thinking that the power companies will have to run fiberoptic to the customer side of each of their lowest-level distribution transformers. (As an example, in my case, my residential power feed is a 240 VAC line that is parallel shared with about a dozen other residences. This 240 VAC is created from a 16 kV to 240 V transformer.) The power service is already "right to my home." OTOH, the 16 kV distribution feeds are not always "running right past your home." (True, the 16 kV lines do run past some homes, in order to get to an efficient feed point for the 16 kV to 240 V transformer. Some people have their power flow "past" them, at 16 kV, only to come "back" at them at 240 V.) BPL, as I understand it, will be radiating from a huge number of these 240 V residential clusters. Since the power company will have to use fiberoptic to get to their step-down transformers, it seems like they should use fiberoptic for the last leg too. (And then they wouldn't need a fiberoptic-to-240 V coupler at the transformer nor the 240 V-to-coax coupler at each residence.) Ed wb6wsn |
Fractenna wrote:
If BPL is trashing the bands, it will make it that much more difficult to receive HF broadcasts, and HF Amateur transmissions, which will tend to get people away from HF. They won't want to put up with the interference. Bad idea. -SSB How can you be on CB and say that no one puts up with interference? Also, the actual number of hams affected is probably very small, so the point is interesting but probably better posed in the context of :"if we don't get novices again, with no code privileges, then..." 73, Chip N1IR. CB is intended for short range communications, under 120 miles. Rarely will a legal station be able to transmit much more than 20 miles, when the hash and trash aren't throwing their deadkeys and noise toys. Completely different subject. Chip, you probably haven't been out driving around in the areas they were testing BPL, while trying to work a net. You can hear, literally, the "motorboating" from BPL interference 40-50 miles away from a test area. By the time you're within 10 miles of a test area, the noise from the BPL (different from magnesium lights and other urban noise sources) is close to 20db over S9.. making working the net nigh-on impossible. We're talking, minimum, a 100 mile radius around a BPL test site where the interference from BPL makes Amateur HF communications, at a minimum, extremely difficult, and at worst, impossible. Now, mind you, this is receiving from a "compromise" antenna. I've tried switching types from my 40-foot, ICOM AH-4, tuned looped longwire, to Hustler "dummy loads", to Hamstick whips, to Iron Horse whips, to 102" SS whips tuned with LDG tuners, on the 10, 20, 40, 75, and 80 meter bands. ALL of them were affected to varying degrees, but none were affected so little as to make communications in these areas possible. So your contextual assumptions do not apply to this situation in the least. IMHO, BPL is a bad for the Amateur community, and for emergency communications in general. The interference on CB is a completely different story. -SSB Understood that you have certain feelings on the matter. Nonetheless, after careful analysis of the data, the FCC does not have the same extreme view. It is time to move on,not waste any more time and money, and welcome the new technology. Provisions exist to deal with the rare problems when they come up. I would be very interested in any recording you may have of noise levels that high, Chris. Certainly you have greater mobility capability than many others in noting potential RFI from tens of miles away. 73, Chip N1IR |
Oh, and I am licensed. In fact I went from 22 years on just CB to
Extra in 6 months, without having to study anything except the Code. I'm dyslexic, so I had quite the time with that. Took me three tries to pass the code, but I did it, without a waiver. Congrats on the persistence! Back when I took the extra, you had to send 20 WPM --with a straight key--unless you were rich enough to have and bring a keyer--they weren't small or built-in those days! I think I could still send 20 WPM on a straight key, but I'm sure my arm would cramp up real fast. The first time I took the general, I failed on the code copy. I bought one of those code LP's (I'm old, I know) and then studied a little. Failed again. That very night, I sat copying W1AW and did so for 30 nights straight. Then I passed the exam. Good life lesson for a youngster. 73, Chip N1IR |
Fractenna wrote: I would be very interested in any recording you may have of noise levels that high, Chris. Certainly you have greater mobility capability than many others in noting potential RFI from tens of miles away. 73, Chip N1IR Just as I would be interested in the sources of your data on the Fractal antenna vs. the dipole in the aforementioned situation. That is to say, the name(s) of the test range(s) you employed, and a POC at each range. Until that happens, my data is just as valid as yours. Of course, mine's reproducible, and I can cite many others who have experienced the same interference from BPL on different antennae than I've tried, to include bugcatchers and screwdrivers. I have a feeling my data is more valid than yours. Besides, you try to document S-meter readings on different HF rigs while rolling 65+ MPH down the road in a 73-foot long articulated vehicle weighing up to 80,000 pounds. I'm sure you'd rather have me driving than writing. I can only document, after the fact, where, when, and a very close estimation of what the s-meter readings were. Can you even come close to this? -SSB -SSB |
I'm young.. but I'm not that young.. I remember 8-tracks, and they
were still popular while I was a child. I still have LP's, and a player that works to play them on. Besides, Vinyl Sounds Better. I got into Amateur radio later in life. In fact, I've not yet been licensed for 4 years. This still doesn't speak to my knowledge in this area. I'll be the first to admit I have things to learn, and I'm no expert in any one area. I do know what I've experienced with BPL, and it's not been pleasant. Just ask the folks around the Orlando, Florida area... Their BPL tests can be heard all the way across the state in Titusville, and so greatly that it interferes with communications. -SSB Fractenna wrote: Oh, and I am licensed. In fact I went from 22 years on just CB to Extra in 6 months, without having to study anything except the Code. I'm dyslexic, so I had quite the time with that. Took me three tries to pass the code, but I did it, without a waiver. Congrats on the persistence! Back when I took the extra, you had to send 20 WPM --with a straight key--unless you were rich enough to have and bring a keyer--they weren't small or built-in those days! I think I could still send 20 WPM on a straight key, but I'm sure my arm would cramp up real fast. The first time I took the general, I failed on the code copy. I bought one of those code LP's (I'm old, I know) and then studied a little. Failed again. That very night, I sat copying W1AW and did so for 30 nights straight. Then I passed the exam. Good life lesson for a youngster. 73, Chip N1IR |
Just as I would be interested in the sources of your data on the
Fractal antenna vs. the dipole in the aforementioned situation. That is to say, the name(s) of the test range(s) you employed, and a POC at each range. Hi Chris, Well, i answered your question, and since I have no reason to share it (when no one else is interested), I e-mailed it to you. Here's what I got back: ------------------------------ ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- .... while talking to cac.net.mail9.psmtp.com.: RCPT 550 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table 550 ... User unknown -------------------------------------- I conclude that you have no interest in the answer and just want to waste others' time. Sorry; not playing. 73, Chip N1IR |
I have an unanswered question about BPL. Where I live has a very old power
line system, full of splices and corrosion. How will splices affect the 1) the internet signal and 2) RFI? Randy ka4nma |
(nt)
|
Well, if you've figured out my call, then you can figure out how to
find my real email address... Like I'd put it on usenet so I can get more SPAM... -SSB Fractenna wrote: Just as I would be interested in the sources of your data on the Fractal antenna vs. the dipole in the aforementioned situation. That is to say, the name(s) of the test range(s) you employed, and a POC at each range. Hi Chris, Well, i answered your question, and since I have no reason to share it (when no one else is interested), I e-mailed it to you. Here's what I got back: ------------------------------ ----- The following addresses had permanent fatal errors ----- ----- Transcript of session follows ----- ... while talking to cac.net.mail9.psmtp.com.: RCPT 550 : Recipient address rejected: User unknown in local recipient table 550 ... User unknown -------------------------------------- I conclude that you have no interest in the answer and just want to waste others' time. Sorry; not playing. 73, Chip N1IR |
Richard,
I wonder if 'they' will hold up the 'taking of office' until after all the 'provisional' ballots are counted? What if the count should change to favor the 'looser'? Wonder why I am still amazed to hear how the government has "solved" a problem? 'Doc PS - It was a joke, right?? |
Good point ed !
Here in NC the bpl was wifi with a sealth antenna inside a streelight so the hoa and others would not see it. I agree, with all the poles they own along with the hi tension right of ways, would cost them less to bury the fiber on the way then go wifi. scotty Ed wrote: "Fractenna" wrote in message ... Dear OM, I am sorry that you take personal offense; I will be happy to state why this was posted: 1) it has been an ongoing topic on this NG for a long time, and now we have final resolution; 2) I did not expect nor require anyone to respond, ergo the 'troll factor' is not an issue; 3) The FCC has taken careful and measured steps to assure that US amateurs remain with the enjoyment of the HF bands, given the sharing of spectrum with BPL. 4)It is the very best scenario for all involved. That is definitely worth gloating over. Wishing you the best, Chip N1IR The "very best solution" would be to allow the utilities to use their extensive system of power poles to string a fiberoptic cable to residences (either direct, or maybe the last half-mile as an RF node). If the power companies had spent their lobbying and legal money on installing this base, a lot of people would now have high-speed net connections. BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications step that should be bypassed. You may gloat over your prediction accuracy, but certainly not over the existence of any form of BPL. Ed wb6wsn |
Sorry but I don't think so !
No, I don't have an impressive resume or advance degree in RF or anything. BPL can't turn a profit without a large customer base. So, this bs about the rural folk getting their internet cheap don't fly because of all the hardware they need to string out in the country and that cost money. Do you think the telco and cable co will loose customers to bpl, I don't. DSL has dropped in price several times since the BPL dog and pony show has started. Cable roadrunner has reduced the price and increased speed. Now cell phone companies have the capacity to offer it via the new phones and with a network card in your laptop or desktop. If people need internet in rural area, let them dial in like I do. Sure the kids need internet to stay on top of stuff but don't need to download Gb size files with music and movie crap. scotty Fractenna wrote: BPL is simply a poor technical solution, and is an interim communications step that should be bypassed. Why wait? People have things to say and see right now. Ultimately, all telecom systems transition. BPL has the good fortune of having an infrastructure and a need right now; tomorrow; and for some time to come. Seize the day! Solve a pressing problem. BPL looks very promising. 73, Chip N1IR |
Go to tools, message rules, Blocked Senders List, News Rules, and check
the approapriate sections. works fine... de Jer... "Old Ed" wrote in message ink.net... But for someone who comes on an amateur radio forum to gloat over the probable destruction of the HF radio spectrum, I'll make an exception. Will someone please tell me how to "killfile" this F***ING STUPID TROLL? I haven't quite figured out how to do it in OE6. (That will also save me from feeding this Troll, which I'm afraid I just did.) Thanks... "Fractenna" wrote in message ... For those who don't know it yet, the FCC approved modifications to Part 15 regarding BPL. This is an extraordinary example of the FCC being both responsive to the --need-for new technologies and innovative spectrum use, while invoking new guidelines and requirements to assure dual use between licensed and unlicensed users. I agree with Mr. Powell's assessment that it was a "banner day". The FCC did a spectacular job! But, if you've followed my comments, you knew that this was my prediction for some time... 73, Chip N1IR |
"Theplanters95" wrote in message ... I have an unanswered question about BPL. Where I live has a very old power line system, full of splices and corrosion. How will splices affect the 1) the internet signal and 2) RFI? Randy ka4nma The internet signal will be crappy and subject to interruption by static from all kinds of sources. RFI generation will be severe. I do not know whether the splices and corrosion will make it worse but it certainly won't help matters. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
Dee D. Flint wrote:
"Theplanters95" wrote in message ... I have an unanswered question about BPL. Where I live has a very old power line system, full of splices and corrosion. How will splices affect the 1) the internet signal and 2) RFI? Randy ka4nma The internet signal will be crappy and subject to interruption by static from all kinds of sources. RFI generation will be severe. I do not know whether the splices and corrosion will make it worse but it certainly won't help matters. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE If open wire (telephone line) is a precident- ANY HI RESISTANCE, or ground, or arcing in the instance of power will cause an unbalance of the circuit. This causes a very high noise level on that circuit pair, and would also cause it to RADIATE interference! And, consider, that power companies have substancial arcing (caused by dirt, and loose hardware), and ESCAPE (the induction from an A.C. line to other objects, if the voltage is high enough and the magnetic field is strong enough), like fence lines and telephone co. messenger (the steel cable that supports their telco cables), paralleling it, and arcing to ground - there are several undesired effects even WITHOUT BPL to cause QRN ! And btw, it is NOT necessary for a very good ground to cause problems- just tree limbs are enough to cause a problem in this area. ONLY GOOD part of the situation is the more current that flows thru the wire (and hence the sleeves), the internal arcing in those bad sleeves tends to "SEAL" or heal themselves for a duration- but if the current lowers to a substantial amount, the problem will be BAAAAAACCCK !!! As info, Jim NN7K -- To reply, remove the NOSPAM |
|
sideband wrote in message
I'll be the first to admit I have things to learn, and I'm no expert in any one area. I do know what I've experienced with BPL, and it's not been pleasant. Just ask the folks around the Orlando, Florida area... Their BPL tests can be heard all the way across the state in Titusville, and so greatly that it interferes with communications. Money talks, and common sense and real world reports take a walk. In most cases anyway. Some companies have already tried and discarded BPL. Problems o-plenty. Maybe others will see the light. The dark side has won a major battle, and Darth Chipster gloateth o-plenty, but the day is not lost yet. My R2 unit, "henry 2k console model", is jumping around beeping and squeaking just itching to join the battle. If they attack locally, I will give them sporadic shots of my BPL death beam via my various elevated radiating devices. I'll have them locking up like a J38 model speedsters hitting a canyon wall. The F.C.C brass should be flogged with leather whips for the obvious disregard of the currents users of the HF spectrum. It's all about money...Nothing else. All the reports of problems with the systems were ignored. "Except by some owners, who dropped out of the BPL testing" Also, many claims are pretty hokey...IE: they claim that they can null out problem frequencies, IE:, aircraft, etc, etc. But I hear of problems doing this. I hear it's not really that feasable if they want to maintain proper operation, and I also hear it doesn't really cure the problem, as the "nulling device" is not far from the user. Take just aircraft alone...We are talking nulling say 2-3 mhz, 6 mhz, 8 mhz, 10 mhz, 11 mhz, 13 mhz, 17 mhz, 21 mhz, 27 mhz, just for a few...I may have missed some military bands, etc... I have heard of no notching plans for amateur bands, so I guess we have to go to rf noise hell...:( I bet the system will work great with all those notched holes...Not.... They still will be radiating those freq's on the main lines I would think. It's the biggest money grubbing farce I've ever heard of. Heck, with my radios and antennas, they could probably be blocks or even miles away, and I could still hear it. The Florida experience backs me up on this. I'm not just barking at the moon. Bye bye weak DX....Bye bye weak aircraft signals. Bye bye any rf weaklings...QRp will be extra fun being half the country will probably soon have their ears plugged with digital spew. But, I bet they will hear me too, if the leakage is that bad...:) It will be a bad day for the empire if my R2 unit joins the fray. I'll keep those BPL techs a hopping all over the neighborhood. Remember, most of the speculation is about damage to the hams, etc... But don't ignore the damage all the 1000's of hams and other rf emitting device owners will likely cause them. CB's will have to deal with them also, and you know how nasty signaled some cb'ers can get. I hear some 4-5 mhz wide as it is... I don't think they have really fully taken this into account yet. MK |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:24 PM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com