|
Even if the limits are raised, the rules will still not permit them to
interfere with licensed services such as commercial broadcasting and amateur radio even if their emissions are within limits. They would have to change that provision also. You think they wouldn't change it?? How much commerical broadcasting goes on between 2-80 MHz? Is it a coincidence that the AM band stops just below 2 MHz and the FM one starts just above 80 MHz? Just imagine all the world's DXers being crowded into the 160m band - yikes! Derek aa5bt |
|
|
Even if the limits are raised, the rules will still not permit them
to interfere with licensed services such as commercial broadcasting and amateur radio even if their emissions are within limits. They would have to change that provision also. I don't think you have a grasp of the problem. Consider the current part 15 rules that are completely ignored by the manufacturers of cheap electronics. They just sell cheap junk and let us fight with our neighbors about interference or RFI. How many new hams do you know that have quit HF because of RFI problems with cheap telephones and other electronics? The BPL providers will just push the problem off to their customers and let us fight with our neighbors. When they are forced to act, they'll find ways to stall and avoid fixing the problems as long as possible (just like they do with leaky insulators and bad grounds). Most hams will become discouraged and give-up on HF. Imagine this scenario: Your neighbor gets a shiny new BPL internet connection and is dazzled by it's performance. You have serious interference from his connection. You complain. The Power Company contacts your neighbor and says 'we're disconnecting you (and all your neighbors) because the HAM next door doesn't like the noise your internet connection makes on his radio'. Guess who ends up the bad guy. Steve |
Even if the limits are raised, the rules will still not permit them
to interfere with licensed services such as commercial broadcasting and amateur radio even if their emissions are within limits. They would have to change that provision also. I don't think you have a grasp of the problem. Consider the current part 15 rules that are completely ignored by the manufacturers of cheap electronics. They just sell cheap junk and let us fight with our neighbors about interference or RFI. How many new hams do you know that have quit HF because of RFI problems with cheap telephones and other electronics? The BPL providers will just push the problem off to their customers and let us fight with our neighbors. When they are forced to act, they'll find ways to stall and avoid fixing the problems as long as possible (just like they do with leaky insulators and bad grounds). Most hams will become discouraged and give-up on HF. Imagine this scenario: Your neighbor gets a shiny new BPL internet connection and is dazzled by it's performance. You have serious interference from his connection. You complain. The Power Company contacts your neighbor and says 'we're disconnecting you (and all your neighbors) because the HAM next door doesn't like the noise your internet connection makes on his radio'. Guess who ends up the bad guy. Steve |
"Dee D. Flint" said :
Keep in mind that the non-ham frequencies are also used by somebody (government, commercial interests, etc.). So skipping around the ham frequencies doesn't really solve the problem. Some one is going to be interfered with. Might also be interesting in aviation circles as well...75 MHz markers are still in use as far as I know...usually on criticl ILS approaches (Not IFR rated-yet-but I remember this from my theory way-back-when). 73 de Peter, W2IRT (ex-AB2NZ, VE3THX) Please reply to Double-you Two Eye Are Tee at Arrl.net |
"Dee D. Flint" said :
Keep in mind that the non-ham frequencies are also used by somebody (government, commercial interests, etc.). So skipping around the ham frequencies doesn't really solve the problem. Some one is going to be interfered with. Might also be interesting in aviation circles as well...75 MHz markers are still in use as far as I know...usually on criticl ILS approaches (Not IFR rated-yet-but I remember this from my theory way-back-when). 73 de Peter, W2IRT (ex-AB2NZ, VE3THX) Please reply to Double-you Two Eye Are Tee at Arrl.net |
"Derek Wills" wrote in message ... I know the proposed BPL system uses frequencies from 2-80 MHz and I belive it uses spread spectrum. At the moment, it does not appear that they are using the entire 2-80 MHz, at least in Emmaus, PA ... but they could expand. Does it have to use every possible freq in that range or could it skip the ham bands if we kick up enough fuss? There is still the issue of intermod, harmonics, etc. And, simply avoiding the ham bands won't protect the other users of HF. NTIA and its USG "clients" will, hopefully, be one of our strongest allies ... we should not take a "protect us and the heck with everyone else" approach ... to do so would dillute our potential support. It seems pretty clear to me that it will happen - 150,000 hams are outnumbered by more than 100:1 by those who want broadband delivered to the doorstep. Not only do I think it will happen, but I also expect the RFI levels to be "adjusted" so as to allow more pollution - hey, it works for greenhouse gas and power plants and...... Clearly, BPL proponents want to be allowed to use higher levels. That, of course, will only make the interference that much worse than it already is (which is MORE than bad enough - horrible, in fact). 73, Carl - wk3c |
"Derek Wills" wrote in message ... I know the proposed BPL system uses frequencies from 2-80 MHz and I belive it uses spread spectrum. At the moment, it does not appear that they are using the entire 2-80 MHz, at least in Emmaus, PA ... but they could expand. Does it have to use every possible freq in that range or could it skip the ham bands if we kick up enough fuss? There is still the issue of intermod, harmonics, etc. And, simply avoiding the ham bands won't protect the other users of HF. NTIA and its USG "clients" will, hopefully, be one of our strongest allies ... we should not take a "protect us and the heck with everyone else" approach ... to do so would dillute our potential support. It seems pretty clear to me that it will happen - 150,000 hams are outnumbered by more than 100:1 by those who want broadband delivered to the doorstep. Not only do I think it will happen, but I also expect the RFI levels to be "adjusted" so as to allow more pollution - hey, it works for greenhouse gas and power plants and...... Clearly, BPL proponents want to be allowed to use higher levels. That, of course, will only make the interference that much worse than it already is (which is MORE than bad enough - horrible, in fact). 73, Carl - wk3c |
avoiding the ham bands won't protect the other users of HF.
NTIA and its USG "clients" will, hopefully, be one of our strongest allies ... we should not take a "protect us and the heck with everyone else" approach ... to do so would dillute our potential support. I saw a report yesterday to the effect that some AM stations were being wiped out by BPL noise. The number of people needing their daily fix of Dr Laura and Rush PooBah easily outnumber the ARRL membership, so this is good news for us. Derek aa5bt |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 06:53 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com