Steveo wrote:
"Jim Hampton" wrote:

It will be interesting as it will not be protected from legitimate users.
I did not keep the URL, but tests were run in one area with BPL. Filters
were in use to "reduce" interference to the amateur bands. A test was
run connecting through BPL with a computer and a 20 meter dipole up some
modest height (again, I don't recall exact figures). It seems 20 watts
or so caused 70% packet loss and 50 watts rendered BPL 100% unusable.
I'm not going to say what will or will not be; it seems, to me at least,
that there was a lot of salesmanship and little technical thought in this
whole process. We shall see.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim


I'm not sure anyone really knows what will happen if they
plug that in.

"We shall see" is it.


what does the gov have to say???????????

jim wrote:
Steveo wrote:
"Jim Hampton" wrote:

It will be interesting as it will not be protected from legitimate
users. I did not keep the URL, but tests were run in one area with BPL.
Filters were in use to "reduce" interference to the amateur bands. A
test was run connecting through BPL with a computer and a 20 meter
dipole up some modest height (again, I don't recall exact figures). It
seems 20 watts or so caused 70% packet loss and 50 watts rendered BPL
100% unusable. I'm not going to say what will or will not be; it seems,
to me at least, that there was a lot of salesmanship and little
technical thought in this whole process. We shall see.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim


I'm not sure anyone really knows what will happen if they
plug that in.

"We shall see" is it.


what does the gov have to say???????????

You mean the FCC right? They seem to be all for it. ($$$)

I'm sure someone will correct me if I'm wrong.

--
http://NewsReader.Com/
50 GB/Month

"jim" wrote in message ...


Steveo wrote:
"Jim Hampton" wrote:

It will be interesting as it will not be protected from legitimate users.
I did not keep the URL, but tests were run in one area with BPL. Filters
were in use to "reduce" interference to the amateur bands. A test was
run connecting through BPL with a computer and a 20 meter dipole up some
modest height (again, I don't recall exact figures). It seems 20 watts
or so caused 70% packet loss and 50 watts rendered BPL 100% unusable.
I'm not going to say what will or will not be; it seems, to me at least,
that there was a lot of salesmanship and little technical thought in this
whole process. We shall see.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim


I'm not sure anyone really knows what will happen if they
plug that in.

"We shall see" is it.


what does the gov have to say???????????

You mean Gov Arnold? G

LOL!!!!!!!

Landshark


--
Try these to learn about newsgroup trolls.

http://www.io.com/~zikzak/troll_thesis.html
http://members.aol.com/intwg/trolls.htm

"Landshark" wrote:
"jim" wrote in message
what does the gov have to say???????????

You mean Gov Arnold? G

LOL!!!!!!!

Landshark

That's only for you left coast operators. (crazy *******s)

--
http://NewsReader.Com/
50 GB/Month

Steveo wrote:
"Jim Hampton" wrote:
It will be interesting as it will not be protected from legitimate
users. I did not keep the URL, but tests were run in one area with BPL.
Filters were in use to "reduce" interference to the amateur bands. A
test was run connecting through BPL with a computer and a 20 meter
dipole up some modest height (again, I don't recall exact figures). It
seems 20 watts or so caused 70% packet loss and 50 watts rendered BPL
100% unusable. I'm not going to say what will or will not be; it seems,
to me at least, that there was a lot of salesmanship and little
technical thought in this whole process. We shall see.

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim

I'm not sure anyone really knows what will happen if they
plug that in.

"We shall see" is it.

By the way, Jim, That was a cool test description you posted.

Thanks. In fact I shared it with someone. ;)

--
http://NewsReader.Com/
50 GB/Month

From:
Snip
The only "fool" is one that can't see the forest for the trees. The gist
of the article, is matters that are of inherent concern to hammie radio,
are widely agreed upon, unlike the few who hammies in rec.radio.cb who
like to lay their life's problems at the feet of cbers who may dx.
Snip
_
Not that I favor any BPL technology but it will

be interesting to see how the ever present

letter of the law frequency police that troll this

group react to new rules concerning amateur

radio and BPL. I wonder if they will adhere to

the letter of the law when it concerns them?
_
Doubtfully. For the most part, there are but a handful of hammies on
this group who post regularly worth their salt, and after you count them
on one hand, you still have a finger or two left over. The rest have
issues with themselves, not cb. They are unable to handle two issues at
once. Cb AND hammie radio makes it too complicated for some,,,like
walking and chewing gum.