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