"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net...

Since
97.1 is headlined "Basis and Purpose", we can pretty much accept that
97.1(a) is the equivalent of a direct order.

An order to the entire ARS, not to individual amateurs. Of course, if
no
individual amateurs do what 97.1(a) says, the ARS doesn't do it
either.

And a service which doesn't at least fulfill its B&P loses its reason
to exist.

Putting it another way, if ARRL BoD at their meeting this weekend passes
a resolution that the FCC has not authorized us to public service
communications, and therefore hams are no longer mandated to provide it,
our continued use of the spectrum would come to a quick end.

Fortunately, that won't ever happen.

But the following might:

Last evening I had the pleasure and honor of attending a meeting
of a large and well-known radio club. The meeting was well
attended due to the excellent program presented by Ed Hare, W1RFI,
on BPL.

In both simulation and actual measurements, BPL systems cause
interference levels that make any affected band virtually
useless for communication for amateurs and others near such systems.
Depending on the vagaries of HF propagation, amateurs and others
may experience harmful interference from systems that are not
nearby.

ARRL is doing all it can to fight the BPL threat, but there is no
guarantee they will be successful. The BPL companies are promising
inexpensive broadband access, new jobs, competition, new technology,
and all the other electropolitically and econopolitically correct
terms folks like to hear.

If this sounds like I'm stumping for support for ARRL and the fight
against BPL, yer dern right. Because if BPL gets implemented on
any sort of wide scale, issues like license tests or the
appropriateness of certain callsigns will be academic.

What does all this have to do with public service? Simple: The ARS'
right to exist is seriously threatened by BPL. The companies
pushing it say there are millions of people just begging for the
service, more jobs, etc.. And many of the systems work within
*existing* Part 15 radiated emission limits.

So in some ways it comes down to 'which is more important - this
newbroadband technology or ham radio?' Do you want to defend the
existence of amateur
radio based purely on it being "a fun hobby" with no reference to
public
service? If it comes down to that, we'll lose. Big time.

Some might say "BPL isn't my problem; I don't work those bands".
Trouble
is, you may have to deal with BPL harmonics. And a precedent that it's
OK for an unlicensed unintentional radiator to wipe out hams on HF and
low VHF sets
up a very grim future for any ham band.

Hans is right - take away the public service aspect, and the ARS'
reason
to exist is radically reduced, if not totally eliminated. Which may be
exactly why some nonhams find it necessary to deny that amateur radio
provides any public service, and to describe amateur radio as purely
"a fun hobby".

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
"KØHB" wrote in message ink.net...


Since
97.1 is headlined "Basis and Purpose", we can pretty much accept that
97.1(a) is the equivalent of a direct order.


An order to the entire ARS, not to individual amateurs. Of course, if
no
individual amateurs do what 97.1(a) says, the ARS doesn't do it
either.

And a service which doesn't at least fulfill its B&P loses its reason
to exist.

Putting it another way, if ARRL BoD at their meeting this weekend passes
a resolution that the FCC has not authorized us to public service
communications, and therefore hams are no longer mandated to provide it,
our continued use of the spectrum would come to a quick end.


Fortunately, that won't ever happen.

But the following might:

Last evening I had the pleasure and honor of attending a meeting
of a large and well-known radio club. The meeting was well
attended due to the excellent program presented by Ed Hare, W1RFI,
on BPL.

In both simulation and actual measurements, BPL systems cause
interference levels that make any affected band virtually
useless for communication for amateurs and others near such systems.
Depending on the vagaries of HF propagation, amateurs and others
may experience harmful interference from systems that are not
nearby.

ARRL is doing all it can to fight the BPL threat, but there is no
guarantee they will be successful. The BPL companies are promising
inexpensive broadband access, new jobs, competition, new technology,
and all the other electropolitically and econopolitically correct
terms folks like to hear.

If this sounds like I'm stumping for support for ARRL and the fight
against BPL, yer dern right. Because if BPL gets implemented on
any sort of wide scale, issues like license tests or the
appropriateness of certain callsigns will be academic.

What does all this have to do with public service? Simple: The ARS'
right to exist is seriously threatened by BPL. The companies
pushing it say there are millions of people just begging for the
service, more jobs, etc.. And many of the systems work within
*existing* Part 15 radiated emission limits.

So in some ways it comes down to 'which is more important - this
newbroadband technology or ham radio?' Do you want to defend the
existence of amateur
radio based purely on it being "a fun hobby" with no reference to
public
service? If it comes down to that, we'll lose. Big time.

Some might say "BPL isn't my problem; I don't work those bands".
Trouble
is, you may have to deal with BPL harmonics. And a precedent that it's
OK for an unlicensed unintentional radiator to wipe out hams on HF and
low VHF sets
up a very grim future for any ham band.

Hans is right - take away the public service aspect, and the ARS'
reason
to exist is radically reduced, if not totally eliminated. Which may be
exactly why some nonhams find it necessary to deny that amateur radio
provides any public service, and to describe amateur radio as purely
"a fun hobby".

73 de Jim, N2EY


I fully support the fight against BPL, and suggest that everyone send
support to ARRL either through their clubs or personally.

I do however think that while we must remain vigilant, that BPL will
end up on the trash heap of technology. We need to avoid the near panic
that came out when the abomination was first proposed.

Too many powerful interests are aligning in opposition to it. ARRL,
FEMA, and I believe a Broadcaster's association. The FCC has now
"clarified their "broadband Nirvana" statements.

Austria terminating a BPL test after the pilot project provided
free major interference with A Red Cross Emergency drill adds fuel to the
BPL pyre. This was even after they were considering such fixes as a
buffer zone around amateurs houses.

Finally, it is obvious that the technology DOES NOT WORK! The apparent
need to increase power levels, the fact that a HF radio would have to
operate on QRP levels to not shut down a BPL signal, and that normal
levels of HF signals have been able to shut down BPL over a surprisingly
large range.

And before we take a ARS-centric view of the whole thing, remember that
there are plenty of other users of HF beside us.

Soooooo, if the rules are changed so that BPL gets priority use of the
HF spectrum, reversing the radio universe in that part 15 devices will
tolerate no interference from other devices, and that the other devices
are forced to tolerate interference from the part 15 device, and *every*
other user of the HF spectrum is forced off the air, then maybe, just
maybe, BPL will work....kinda.

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

I fully support the fight against BPL, and suggest that everyone send
support to ARRL either through their clubs or personally.

Also through membership and well-written comments to NOI and NPRM.

I do however think that while we must remain vigilant, that BPL will
end up on the trash heap of technology. We need to avoid the near panic
that came out when the abomination was first proposed.

Maybe it will be trashed - but maybe not. It's not over till it's over, and
even then it's not over. For example, even though Japan rejected BPL
after trials, the BPL companies there are trying again, claiming "new
technology".

And remember that the levels of interference at the various test sites conform
to existing FCC radiated levels!

Too many powerful interests are aligning in opposition to it. ARRL,
FEMA, and I believe a Broadcaster's association. The FCC has now
"clarified their "broadband Nirvana" statements.

Could still happen. Most of those folks don't have installations in residential
neighborhoods. Most hams, OTOH...

Austria terminating a BPL test after the pilot project provided
free major interference with A Red Cross Emergency drill adds fuel to the
BPL pyre. This was even after they were considering such fixes as a
buffer zone around amateurs houses.

We're not in Austria. The EUs usually are a lot more rejecting of pollution
than we are. (BPL's interference is essentially spectrum pollution, wouldn't
you agree?)

Finally, it is obvious that the technology DOES NOT WORK!

No, it *does* work! The demo sites are functioning.

The apparent
need to increase power levels, the fact that a HF radio would have to
operate on QRP levels to not shut down a BPL signal, and that normal
levels of HF signals have been able to shut down BPL over a surprisingly
large range.

In some test sites. But at others, it's a different story. And even such
problems are no guarantee that FCC won't allow it.

Look at Manassas.

And before we take a ARS-centric view of the whole thing, remember
that there are plenty of other users of HF beside us.

Sure - and hopefully the combined effect of all of them will be enough to
convince FCC.

But the job isn't done till it's done.


Soooooo, if the rules are changed so that BPL gets priority use of the
HF spectrum, reversing the radio universe in that part 15 devices will
tolerate no interference from other devices, and that the other devices
are forced to tolerate interference from the part 15 device, and *every*
other user of the HF spectrum is forced off the air, then maybe, just
maybe, BPL will work....kinda.

Stranger things have happened.

Suppose you sit down for a nice bit of PSK and find the waterfall full of noise
- and no signals visible. Do you think the power company is going to interrupt
service so you can operate?

Or suppose you see a signal or two and open up with 100 W. And suppose you dump
the system for a radius of a mile from your house....

Or suppose the local gendarmes show up, responding to complaints from many
angry citizens that *you* are messing up *their* computers. Do you want to
explain Part 15 and Part 97 to them, when they see you as the electronic
equivalent of somebody violating the peace?

Or suppose any time someone calls the help line, the first question the
help person asks is "Is there a ham radio within a mile of your house?"

These are not wild scenarios. They're updates of what used to happen when TV
first came to some areas. Years ago, one ham, W4GJO, was *sued* for TVI
by a nearby bar owner who couldn't get distant TV stations when 'GJO was on the
air. FCC's attitude, and statements, were that the ham's rig was clean and so
it was the TV owner's problem. Yes, the ham eventually won, but it took many
hours and dollars.

None of this means we should panic or over react. But neithr can we think the
problem is licked or that it will go away on its own.

It ain't over till...

73 de Jim, N2EY

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:


I fully support the fight against BPL, and suggest that everyone send
support to ARRL either through their clubs or personally.


Also through membership and well-written comments to NOI and NPRM.

I do however think that while we must remain vigilant, that BPL will
end up on the trash heap of technology. We need to avoid the near panic
that came out when the abomination was first proposed.


Maybe it will be trashed - but maybe not. It's not over till it's over, and
even then it's not over. For example, even though Japan rejected BPL
after trials, the BPL companies there are trying again, claiming "new
technology".

And remember that the levels of interference at the various test sites conform
to existing FCC radiated levels!

Too many powerful interests are aligning in opposition to it. ARRL,
FEMA, and I believe a Broadcaster's association. The FCC has now
"clarified their "broadband Nirvana" statements.


Could still happen. Most of those folks don't have installations in residential
neighborhoods. Most hams, OTOH...


Austria terminating a BPL test after the pilot project provided
free major interference with A Red Cross Emergency drill adds fuel to the
BPL pyre. This was even after they were considering such fixes as a
buffer zone around amateurs houses.


We're not in Austria. The EUs usually are a lot more rejecting of pollution
than we are. (BPL's interference is essentially spectrum pollution, wouldn't
you agree?)

Finally, it is obvious that the technology DOES NOT WORK!


No, it *does* work! The demo sites are functioning.


They are a sort of laboratory condition. If the test results from ARRL
are correct, 1 ham with 100 watts can effectively turn off the service
for quite some distance around him/her. That's what I mean.



The apparent
need to increase power levels, the fact that a HF radio would have to
operate on QRP levels to not shut down a BPL signal, and that normal
levels of HF signals have been able to shut down BPL over a surprisingly
large range.


In some test sites. But at others, it's a different story. And even such
problems are no guarantee that FCC won't allow it.

The market will then take care of it.

Look at Manassas.


Aww, do I have to? 8^)


And before we take a ARS-centric view of the whole thing, remember
that there are plenty of other users of HF beside us.


Sure - and hopefully the combined effect of all of them will be enough to
convince FCC.

But the job isn't done till it's done.

Sure enough. Remember I'm not arguing against a stand against BPL or
the need to fight it. I just want people to not freak.


Soooooo, if the rules are changed so that BPL gets priority use of the
HF spectrum, reversing the radio universe in that part 15 devices will
tolerate no interference from other devices, and that the other devices
are forced to tolerate interference from the part 15 device, and *every*
other user of the HF spectrum is forced off the air, then maybe, just
maybe, BPL will work....kinda.


Stranger things have happened.

Suppose you sit down for a nice bit of PSK and find the waterfall full of noise
- and no signals visible. Do you think the power company is going to interrupt
service so you can operate?

Or suppose you see a signal or two and open up with 100 W. And suppose you dump
the system for a radius of a mile from your house....

Yup, keep on calling CQ. I probably wouldn't go above 50 watts tho' But
even that would be enough to disrupt the BPL.

On a side note, has there been any tests on what solar storms would do
to BPL?


Or suppose the local gendarmes show up, responding to complaints from many
angry citizens that *you* are messing up *their* computers. Do you want to
explain Part 15 and Part 97 to them, when they see you as the electronic
equivalent of somebody violating the peace?

Or suppose any time someone calls the help line, the first question the
help person asks is "Is there a ham radio within a mile of your house?"

Sure enough. All good arguments. And the best arguments for being
steadfast in the fight against BPL. Even though I am certain that in
practice, BPL will fall flat on it's face, that if approved, it will be
a nuisance for some hams and others. But I see different levels of
concern. Concern at a high level such as at the early part of the fight
against BPL, when testing was needed, and arguments presented against
BPL. The present situation, when it is being documented that the system
is very fragile and has a track record of interference to emergency
services (even if it is only a test) allows more leisurely prosecution
of the problem. But prosecution has to go on.

What do you think the F.C.C's response will be when ARRL or FEMA trots
out the Austrian BPL Red Cross interference data? Am I the only one that
thinks that case is darn close to a show stopper?

- Mike KB3EIA -

In article , Mike Coslo writes:

N2EY wrote:
In article , Mike Coslo writes:

I fully support the fight against BPL, and suggest that everyone send
support to ARRL either through their clubs or personally.

Also through membership and well-written comments to NOI and NPRM.

I do however think that while we must remain vigilant, that BPL will
end up on the trash heap of technology. We need to avoid the near panic
that came out when the abomination was first proposed.

Agreed! And as Carl, WK3C urges, we must be sure that interference really
is BPL or we will lose credibility.

Maybe it will be trashed - but maybe not. It's not over till it's over, and
even then it's not over. For example, even though Japan rejected BPL
after trials, the BPL companies there are trying again, claiming "new
technology".

And remember that the levels of interference at the various test sites
conform to existing FCC radiated levels!

Too many powerful interests are aligning in opposition to it. ARRL,
FEMA, and I believe a Broadcaster's association. The FCC has now
"clarified their "broadband Nirvana" statements.

Could still happen. Most of those folks don't have installations in
residential neighborhoods. Most hams, OTOH...

Austria terminating a BPL test after the pilot project provided
free major interference with A Red Cross Emergency drill adds fuel to the
BPL pyre. This was even after they were considering such fixes as a
buffer zone around amateurs houses.

We're not in Austria. The EUs usually are a lot more rejecting of pollution
than we are. (BPL's interference is essentially spectrum pollution,
wouldn't you agree?)

Finally, it is obvious that the technology DOES NOT WORK!

No, it *does* work! The demo sites are functioning.

They are a sort of laboratory condition.

Not really! They are actual residential and business areas, with existing power
lines of many types. While the number of customers isn't large, the technology
*does* work. It's just leaky.

If the test results from ARRL
are correct, 1 ham with 100 watts can effectively turn off the service
for quite some distance around him/her. That's what I mean.

Remember that those results were for a particular kind of system. BPL isn't
one company or one technology. There are several different types competing
to be "the one".

The apparent
need to increase power levels, the fact that a HF radio would have to
operate on QRP levels to not shut down a BPL signal, and that normal
levels of HF signals have been able to shut down BPL over a surprisingly
large range.

In some test sites. But at others, it's a different story. And even such
problems are no guarantee that FCC won't allow it.

The market will then take care of it.

Hopefully. But a lot of really bad things have gotten to market.

Look at Manassas.

Aww, do I have to? 8^)

The whole place is getting BPL.

And before we take a ARS-centric view of the whole thing, remember
that there are plenty of other users of HF beside us.

Sure - and hopefully the combined effect of all of them will be enough to
convince FCC.

But the job isn't done till it's done.

Sure enough. Remember I'm not arguing against a stand against BPL
or the need to fight it. I just want people to not freak.

Of course. But at the same time we mustn't think the job is anywhere near done.

Soooooo, if the rules are changed so that BPL gets priority use of the
HF spectrum, reversing the radio universe in that part 15 devices will
tolerate no interference from other devices, and that the other devices
are forced to tolerate interference from the part 15 device, and *every*
other user of the HF spectrum is forced off the air, then maybe, just
maybe, BPL will work....kinda.


Stranger things have happened.

Suppose you sit down for a nice bit of PSK and find the waterfall full of
noise - and no signals visible. Do you think the power company is going to
interrupt service so you can operate?

Or suppose you see a signal or two and open up with 100 W. And suppose
you dump the system for a radius of a mile from your house....

Yup, keep on calling CQ. I probably wouldn't go above 50 watts tho' But

even that would be enough to disrupt the BPL.

Maybe. You want to try explaining it the police officer at your door? Or the
judge who doesn't want to be told it's not in his jursidiction?

On a side note, has there been any tests on what solar storms would do
to BPL?

Not that I know of. But the effect should not be much.

Or suppose the local gendarmes show up, responding to complaints from
many
angry citizens that *you* are messing up *their* computers. Do you want to
explain Part 15 and Part 97 to them, when they see you as the electronic
equivalent of somebody violating the peace?

Or suppose any time someone calls the help line, the first question the
help person asks is "Is there a ham radio within a mile of your house?"

Sure enough. All good arguments. And the best arguments for being
steadfast in the fight against BPL. Even though I am certain that in
practice, BPL will fall flat on it's face, that if approved, it will be
a nuisance for some hams and others.

More than some hams/ You think that noise won't propagate by sky wave?

But I see different levels of
concern. Concern at a high level such as at the early part of the fight
against BPL, when testing was needed, and arguments presented against
BPL. The present situation, when it is being documented that the system
is very fragile and has a track record of interference to emergency
services (even if it is only a test) allows more leisurely prosecution
of the problem.

Remember that it's not "a system" but rather several competing systems using
different technologies.

And recall that the BPL folks are using all then right buzzwords. "Third pipe"
"new technologies that foster competition" "increased/smarter utilization of
existing infrastructure". Etc., etc., etc....

But prosecution has to go on.

Agreed!

Recall too some of the experiences that hams have already encountered. When
WK3C told the story to a local paper, and demonstrated it, the BPL folks
claimed
'he found a neon sign'. In a residential neighborhood at midday. Right.

And despite the experiences of Austria, Japan and others, BPL advocates say
"there have been no reported interference cases".

That's what we're up against. Make no mistake.

What do you think the F.C.C's response will be when ARRL or FEMA trots
out the Austrian BPL Red Cross interference data?

I don't know. Could be that it was an isolated incident. Or that the Austrian
system
was "different". Never mind that Austrian radiated noise limits are lower than
ours...

Am I the only one that thinks that case is darn close to a show stopper?

I'm not counting on anything yet wrt BPL except that it needs to be fought.

Heck, it doesn't take an EE to see that the whole concept is badly flawed
but the trials are being allowed to progress anyway.

"Hope for the best. Prepare for the worst."

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

On a side note, has there been any tests on what solar storms would do
to BPL?


Unshielded lines probably means their going to be knocked off line rather
easily. On one of the space weather sites, there is a reference to the
solar storm equivalent of the "Perfect Storm". This occurred in the mid
1800s and knocked out landline telegraphy and the induced currents on the
lines leading to shorts in equipment that started several fires. Wish I
still had that URL.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"N2EY" wrote in message
om...
"KØHB" wrote in message
ink.net...

Since
97.1 is headlined "Basis and Purpose", we can pretty much accept that
97.1(a) is the equivalent of a direct order.

An order to the entire ARS, not to individual amateurs. Of course, if
no
individual amateurs do what 97.1(a) says, the ARS doesn't do it
either.

And a service which doesn't at least fulfill its B&P loses its reason
to exist.

I strongly support public service. Yet the Basis and Purpose statement
speaks of encouragement and enhancement of what we already do. It is not
granting us any special authorization or mandate to do what we already do.


[snip] Hans is right - take away the public service aspect, and the ARS'
reason
to exist is radically reduced, if not totally eliminated. Which may be
exactly why some nonhams find it necessary to deny that amateur radio
provides any public service, and to describe amateur radio as purely
"a fun hobby".


I have many times in many forums objected to the phrase "it's just a hobby"
for this very reason. I strongly believe in public service. I strongly
believe that it is one of, but not the only, justification for our
existence. However if we are going to put so much emphasis on this
particular element we have to face the fact that we are very remiss
addressing the other elements listed under Basis and Purpose. But again a
justification to exist is neither a requirement nor an authorization.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes:

I have many times in many forums objected to the phrase "it's just a hobby"
for this very reason.

Okay, it's "not" a hobby.

I strongly believe in public service. I strongly
believe that it is one of, but not the only, justification for our
existence.

Okay, the entire justification for amateur radio is "public service."

However if we are going to put so much emphasis on this
particular element we have to face the fact that we are very remiss
addressing the other elements listed under Basis and Purpose. But again a
justification to exist is neither a requirement nor an authorization.

Okay, so its back to just a hobby again...

Gosh, all this circle chasing is getting tiring. :-)

LHA / WMD

In article om, "Dee D.
Flint" writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
. com...
"KØHB" wrote in message
link.net...

Since
97.1 is headlined "Basis and Purpose", we can pretty much accept that
97.1(a) is the equivalent of a direct order.

An order to the entire ARS, not to individual amateurs. Of course, if
no individual amateurs do what 97.1(a) says, the ARS doesn't do it
either.

And a service which doesn't at least fulfill its B&P loses its reason
to exist.

I strongly support public service. Yet the Basis and Purpose statement
speaks of encouragement and enhancement of what we already do. It is not
granting us any special authorization or mandate to do what we already do.

Maybe. Did you know that the B&P boilerplate was only added in 1951?

To me, the B&P is essentially a sort of expectation of what FCC wants the ARS
to be doing "as a whole". Doesn't mean any particular ham has to do it, but
that
if we as a group don't do those things, eventually there will be no need for an
ARS
to exist.

[snip] Hans is right - take away the public service aspect, and the ARS'
reason
to exist is radically reduced, if not totally eliminated. Which may be
exactly why some nonhams find it necessary to deny that amateur radio
provides any public service, and to describe amateur radio as purely
"a fun hobby".

I have many times in many forums objected to the phrase "it's just a hobby"
for this very reason.

Well said!

I strongly believe in public service. I strongly
believe that it is one of, but not the only, justification for our
existence. However if we are going to put so much emphasis on this
particular element we have to face the fact that we are very remiss
addressing the other elements listed under Basis and Purpose. But again a
justification to exist is neither a requirement nor an authorization.

I agree 100% - I'd use the word "expectation".

73 de Jim, N2EY