Dave Shrader wrote:

Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to
communicate across town on 75 phone will certainly
have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD

Yes it will, and that's when Congress and G.W.Bush
will cough up the "Internet Counter-Terrorism Bill
of 2006" that will limit all HF amateur radio operators
to 5 watts PEP output to prevent this kind of
"cyberterrorism".

After all, they will argue, the QRP people showed that
amateur operators can work the world at that power level.
Anything higher than that should be viewed as really too
dangerous to be left in "civilian" hands. (They will nudge
the Democrats across the aisle and say "You know, just
like handguns", and it will be a slam-dunk).

Don't underestimate the political power of a 500-million-
dollar capital investment.

Jim Bromley, K7JEB
Glendale, AZ, USA

If you read my original post that investment was my opening comment!!

K7JEB wrote:
Dave Shrader wrote:


Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to
communicate across town on 75 phone will certainly
have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD


Yes it will, and that's when Congress and G.W.Bush
will cough up the "Internet Counter-Terrorism Bill
of 2006" that will limit all HF amateur radio operators
to 5 watts PEP output to prevent this kind of
"cyberterrorism".

After all, they will argue, the QRP people showed that
amateur operators can work the world at that power level.
Anything higher than that should be viewed as really too
dangerous to be left in "civilian" hands. (They will nudge
the Democrats across the aisle and say "You know, just
like handguns", and it will be a slam-dunk).

Don't underestimate the political power of a 500-million-
dollar capital investment.

Jim Bromley, K7JEB
Glendale, AZ, USA

In article mar2c.13348$Zp.12451@fed1read07,
says...
Dave Shrader wrote:

Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to
communicate across town on 75 phone will certainly
have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD

Yes it will, and that's when Congress and G.W.Bush
will cough up the "Internet Counter-Terrorism Bill
of 2006" that will limit all HF amateur radio operators
to 5 watts PEP output to prevent this kind of
"cyberterrorism".

After all, they will argue, the QRP people showed that
amateur operators can work the world at that power level.
Anything higher than that should be viewed as really too
dangerous to be left in "civilian" hands. (They will nudge
the Democrats across the aisle and say "You know, just
like handguns", and it will be a slam-dunk).

Don't underestimate the political power of a 500-million-
dollar capital investment.

Jim,

You make a good point. It's happened before where amateurs lost
spectrum. Remember the UPS fiasco where they snagged a chunk of the 220
band?

And of course there was the LEO debacle.

We really need to fight this and make them do the right thing. And it's
a bit like un-ringing the bell. There are a whole lot of transceivers
out there that put out anywhere from 50W to 200W right out of the box.
And a whole lot more amps that kick up to the 1.5KW range. Granted, the
FCC knows who and where every ham in the U.S. happens to be, but they
don't know exactly what gear you've got do they? I mean I'm an extra
without an HF rig right now.

And when you think about it, a properly placed 5W transmitter will do
stuttering wonders for BPL.

BPL needs to be killed and pronto.

Tony P. wrote:

We really need to fight this and make them do the right thing. And it's
a bit like un-ringing the bell. There are a whole lot of transceivers
out there that put out anywhere from 50W to 200W right out of the box.
And a whole lot more amps that kick up to the 1.5KW range. Granted, the
FCC knows who and where every ham in the U.S. happens to be, but they
don't know exactly what gear you've got do they? I mean I'm an extra
without an HF rig right now.

And when you think about it, a properly placed 5W transmitter will do
stuttering wonders for BPL.

BPL needs to be killed and pronto.


The FCC tune has already changed. Read the article at:

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/09/1/?nc=1

Notice the FCC statement "...Powell responded to the question by saying
the FCC would not let BPL interfere with critical services."

Now the protection appears to have migrated to "critical" services only,
and the burden of proof is thus shifted to amateur radio to show how our
service is "critical" and worthy of protection against the
best-thing-since-sliced-bread BPL.

And they are about to lock up a goddamn housewife while these vultures
roam unimpeded...


73 ... WA7AA



--

Anti-spam measu look me up on qrz.com if you need to reply directly

Tony P. wrote:

We really need to fight this and make them do the right thing. And it's
a bit like un-ringing the bell. There are a whole lot of transceivers
out there that put out anywhere from 50W to 200W right out of the box.
And a whole lot more amps that kick up to the 1.5KW range. Granted, the
FCC knows who and where every ham in the U.S. happens to be, but they
don't know exactly what gear you've got do they? I mean I'm an extra
without an HF rig right now.

And when you think about it, a properly placed 5W transmitter will do
stuttering wonders for BPL.

BPL needs to be killed and pronto.


The FCC tune has already changed. Read the article at:

http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/03/09/1/?nc=1

Notice the FCC statement "...Powell responded to the question by saying
the FCC would not let BPL interfere with critical services."

Now the protection appears to have migrated to "critical" services only,
and the burden of proof is thus shifted to amateur radio to show how our
service is "critical" and worthy of protection against the
best-thing-since-sliced-bread BPL.

And they are about to lock up a goddamn housewife while these vultures
roam unimpeded...


73 ... WA7AA



--

Anti-spam measu look me up on qrz.com if you need to reply directly

If you read my original post that investment was my opening comment!!

K7JEB wrote:
Dave Shrader wrote:


Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to
communicate across town on 75 phone will certainly
have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD


Yes it will, and that's when Congress and G.W.Bush
will cough up the "Internet Counter-Terrorism Bill
of 2006" that will limit all HF amateur radio operators
to 5 watts PEP output to prevent this kind of
"cyberterrorism".

After all, they will argue, the QRP people showed that
amateur operators can work the world at that power level.
Anything higher than that should be viewed as really too
dangerous to be left in "civilian" hands. (They will nudge
the Democrats across the aisle and say "You know, just
like handguns", and it will be a slam-dunk).

Don't underestimate the political power of a 500-million-
dollar capital investment.

Jim Bromley, K7JEB
Glendale, AZ, USA

In article mar2c.13348$Zp.12451@fed1read07,
says...
Dave Shrader wrote:

Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to
communicate across town on 75 phone will certainly
have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD

Yes it will, and that's when Congress and G.W.Bush
will cough up the "Internet Counter-Terrorism Bill
of 2006" that will limit all HF amateur radio operators
to 5 watts PEP output to prevent this kind of
"cyberterrorism".

After all, they will argue, the QRP people showed that
amateur operators can work the world at that power level.
Anything higher than that should be viewed as really too
dangerous to be left in "civilian" hands. (They will nudge
the Democrats across the aisle and say "You know, just
like handguns", and it will be a slam-dunk).

Don't underestimate the political power of a 500-million-
dollar capital investment.

Jim,

You make a good point. It's happened before where amateurs lost
spectrum. Remember the UPS fiasco where they snagged a chunk of the 220
band?

And of course there was the LEO debacle.

We really need to fight this and make them do the right thing. And it's
a bit like un-ringing the bell. There are a whole lot of transceivers
out there that put out anywhere from 50W to 200W right out of the box.
And a whole lot more amps that kick up to the 1.5KW range. Granted, the
FCC knows who and where every ham in the U.S. happens to be, but they
don't know exactly what gear you've got do they? I mean I'm an extra
without an HF rig right now.

And when you think about it, a properly placed 5W transmitter will do
stuttering wonders for BPL.

BPL needs to be killed and pronto.

Dave Shrader wrote:


Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to communicate across town
on 75 phone will certainly have an impact on local BPL users!!!

With the amount of interference and noise BPL will make, we will likely
not be in
violation of using excessive power "to carry on the desired
communications". And
we are federally licensed, so that would preempt any local rules and
also trump part 15.

In rec.radio.amateur.dx Dave Shrader wrote:
There will be so much capital investment by companies in BPL that the
courts won't dare to overturn the decision!!!! The FCC will cave to the
$$$ interest, if they have not already done so.

They have. Mikey Powell was just in Raleigh (where I am)
talking to the public, and the paper quoted him on the BPL
issue among others. I don't have the exact quote but he
basically said, "We'll try not to harm hobbyists, but BPL
has too much potential (*) to let it be stopped."

(*) "Potential" = "people are going to get RICH on this."

_______________________________________________
Ken Kuzenski AC4RD kuzen001 at acpub .duke .edu
_______________________________________________
All disclaimers apply, see? www.duke.edu/~kuzen001

Now thats a good idea. Kinda like retro radio. From what I heard, during
the days of King Spark, it took KW levels to be heard in the next town.
Lets go for it.

We can send traffic to each part of the country via the National Traffic
System...them set up short and long range relay stations. Dang...just like
it was in the beginning. I like it.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dave Shrader" wrote in message
news:fJi2c.58122$PR3.1057825@attbi_s03...
There will be so much capital investment by companies in BPL that the
courts won't dare to overturn the decision!!!! The FCC will cave to the
$$$ interest, if they have not already done so.

The answer may be to establish local HF nets, need to be local to keep
S/N ratios high, and get on the air during peak internet times and
simply shut down the BPL service at the consumer level. Let the
consumers complain about poor service. Then provide the defense of
non-licensed Part 15 devices etc.

Running 1 KW as the minimum power necessary to communicate across town
on 75 phone will certainly have an impact on local BPL users!!!

DD

Zoran Brlecic wrote:

Hans K0HB wrote:

http://www.infoworld.com/article/04/...service_1.html


Yep, sadly it's becoming a reality.

Personally, I'm looking forward to the day when I program my electronic
keyer into a CQ loop, fire up the amp and leave on a vacation. Of
course, the next logical step is the FCC protecting the BPL by placing
amateur radio in part 15.



WA7AA