"CW" wrote in message
news:zEP2b.267374$o%2.121884@sccrnsc02...
I think there is a big panic about something that will probably be a minor
annoyance to some. Not a problem to most. Do people seriously think that
airports are just going to cease communicating with their planes? How
about
the military HF network. I can see them now. Sitting around the pentagon
saying "forget national security, people have to get their email". Think
about it.

It's my wild ass guess that BPL won't be a big success, but I do think
cheating on the BPL power will be a real temptation. Anyway, it will be
tough on radio hobbyists in a BPL neighborhood, and it certainly will be
heard over a wider region. But, you're probably right. The world isn't
coming to an end over this. Brother Stair has been quiet on the whole BPL
issue.

Frank Dresser

"DickCarroll" wrote in message
om...
"Frank Dresser" analogdial@worldnet




Hey Frank, where'd you ever get the idea that radio *isn't* open to
the public?
I never knew anyone whatever who wanted a ham radio license who was
barred from getting one. There is a small matter of qualifying for it,
of course, as there is in every endeavor where others can and will be
impacted when the licensee knows not which way is up. But it has
always been open to all comers.


OK, amateur radio is open to the public. But nearly all amateur radio
activity is either contacts between hams or some sort of test. I'm under
the impression that amatuers broadcasting what might be considered
entertainment programming to the public is banned. Am I wrong about that?



Now if you're talking "open" like CB is open, that's a horse of an
entirely different color.

Dick

More like pirate radio. I've heard some very entertaining stuff, and I hope
to hear alot more. I know that time can be bought on an independent
broadcaster, but I'd really like to know why what Alan Maxwell and the other
do is illegal. I think hobby broadcasting would bring alot of positive
interest to SW radio.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...


More like pirate radio. I've heard some very entertaining stuff, and I
hope
to hear alot more. I know that time can be bought on an independent
broadcaster, but I'd really like to know why what Alan Maxwell and the
other
do is illegal. I think hobby broadcasting would bring alot of positive
interest to SW radio.

Frank Dresser



It may be fun, but keep in mind a few things. 1) It is difficult to control
where a signal goes. 2) There are international agreements that help to
avoid interference.

Given the above, allowing radio to be a free for all would only serve to
promote interference from stations on the same frequency. That interference
can detract from people listening to transmissions that are complying with
the agreements and laws. Interference can have serious results if it
interferes with aircraft or miliraty communications.

Just imagine the shortwave spectrum being used just like the 27 MHz band.

I'd rather have the order that the laws and agreements provide.

craigm

I'm not an expert on BPL, but I don't have any faith in the FCC's ability to
look past a glossy demo and into the real world, either. If I had been
invited to the demos, I'd have brought my old vacuum cleaner and my
homebuilt PC with the noisy power supply(which, I assume, is good under Part
15 regs. Ha!). I think somebody would give a damn if everyday electrical
noisemakers slowed BPL.


Don't know about BPL, but back when they were testing various proposed
broadcast HDTV
transmission standards, one of the devices used in noise tests was
literally an old vacuum cleaner
motor.

In rec.radio.amateur.policy CW wrote:
I think there is a big panic about something that will probably be a minor
annoyance to some. Not a problem to most. Do people seriously think that
airports are just going to cease communicating with their planes? How about

That is done on VHF, not on HF, AFAIK

the military HF network. I can see them now. Sitting around the pentagon
saying "forget national security, people have to get their email". Think
about it.

BPL chipsets can keep some frequency ranges free from QRM. Somebody in
the german ham newsgroup has looked at it with a spectrum analyzer
or whatever.

And I think military users could change to VHF or UHF, even sat
communications anyway if they wanted. They could also keep BPL
out of special areas. I doubt military users in suburban environments
give a damn about HF.

BPL *is* a real threat.

/ralph

In rec.radio.amateur.policy CW wrote:
There are active military and government frequencies spread throughout the
HF bands, I have, sitting in front of me, two pages worth of active military
frequencies. This does not include FEMA, DEA, ect. Yes, they also use VHF
and satellite but maintain activity on HF for long distance as VHF is line
of sight and satellites are to vulnerable. You can do everything you want to
maintain your chicken little views but some of us know better.

As I have written, BPL devices *do* have the possibility to keep out
of *some* HF frequencies AFAIK. Ham radio would not be the first candidate
for this. Air mobile and military users would be more likely to benefit
from it.

And maybe it is a different perspective here in Austria, as our military
has a lot less influence on our society. We've got utilities actively
deploying this stuff, and while it is far from being everywhere, it is
a real threat in some areas. I suppose they could not care less about
implications of BPL for the military. They just do good lobbying,
and they have shown their political influence in many issues in the
past.

Don't count too much on the military. They might just use this as
an excuse to get funding for a new satellite based infrastructure or
other alternatives. Moreover I suppose HF is most valuable to the
military in crisis regions, where there is no BPL anyway ; )

/ralph

"Ralph Aichinger" wrote in message
...
In rec.radio.amateur.policy CW wrote:

As I have written, BPL devices *do* have the possibility to keep out
of *some* HF frequencies AFAIK. Ham radio would not be the first candidate
for this. Air mobile and military users would be more likely to benefit
from it.

And maybe it is a different perspective here in Austria, as our military
has a lot less influence on our society. We've got utilities actively
deploying this stuff, and while it is far from being everywhere, it is
a real threat in some areas. I suppose they could not care less about
implications of BPL for the military. They just do good lobbying,
and they have shown their political influence in many issues in the
past.

Don't count too much on the military. They might just use this as
an excuse to get funding for a new satellite based infrastructure or
other alternatives. Moreover I suppose HF is most valuable to the
military in crisis regions, where there is no BPL anyway ; )

/ralph

Will BPL have the same effect on military radio as it has on radio
hobbyists? Don't they have spread spectrum capability which is highly
resistant to interference?

Frank Dresser

"Brenda Ann" wrote in message
...


Thing is, BPL is also spread spectrum.. would not two spread spectrum
systems on the same bands interfere with one another??





I don't know alot about spread spectrum, but it's my impression that the
receiver and transmitter are in sync. If the interference doesn't match the
expected synchronization, the receiver ignores it. Also, the bandwidth of
spread spectrum is so wide that spread spectrum operations would have to
overlap, otherwise there would only be a few allowable channels.

But, any spread spectrum experts out there are free to correct me.

Frank Dresser

They probably do but not in widespread use nor is it likely to be. They do
also have the capability to replace most of that HF traffic by satellite.
They did, at one time, start to scale back the HF ops in favor of satellite
but decided that was a bad idea from a reliability standpoint. They do have
the satalite capablity but maintain HF to. The military, in any case, is
only a part of the government HF operation. If bpl has the capability of not
using certain segments of the band, due to the amount of space that would
have to be left alone, the bpl spectrum is going to be pretty holy. In any
case, I really don't think it is a viable technology, I seriously doubt it
will be the major rf disaster that some are saying it will be and I don't
think it will last long if it gets off the ground at all.
"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

Will BPL have the same effect on military radio as it has on radio
hobbyists? Don't they have spread spectrum capability which is highly
resistant to interference?

Frank Dresser

Ralph Aichinger wrote:
In rec.radio.amateur.policy Frank Dresser wrote:


When I wrote "vunerable BPL is to interference", I meant how outside sources
of interference would effect the performance of BPL. Sorry if I wasn't


[..]


If you know where this is all explained in depth and well documented, please
point me in that direction.


I don`t know the details, but here in Europe several pilot projects
were basically stopped and several larger companies got out of that
technology again, after trying to hype it for several years.

I do not know if this is due to unreliability or due to other factors,
but it *seems* to have worked better in the lab than in the real world.
If enough problems make it too unreliable and/or expensive, this might
be the easiest way out.

I wonder if the lab has defective transformers that spew out rfi? I
wonder if the lab regulary simulates lightning strikes on the lines
carrying BPL? I wonder if the labs simulate the sometimes awful
antiquated power lines that the signal would have to go over?

- Mike KB3EIA -