Len Over 21 wrote:

In article , "Jim Hampton"
writes:


It would seem prudent to have the ARRL petition the FCC to raise amateur
power limits to partially recover that lost 10 dB. I think perhaps a 10 kw
limit would be close enough. It might also make BPL communications a bit
dicey too


Har! :-) :-) :-)

I was totally flabbergasted at reading the Phase 2 report. They
boldly went where no technical person dared to go in saying
"BPL will 'improve' the electric power line noise problems!"

Ideology trumps science! Yes, that was a shocking thing to read.


As of the end of the business day on Friday, 18 June 2004, the
Comment numbers in the FCC ECFS were -

docket 04-37 (NPRM) 1,399
docket 03-104 (NOI) 6,076

There's lots of more-than-one-page real technical problem
presentations there showing that Access BPL is full of snit
than there are for the BPL proponents. I don't think that will
matter much.

The writing seemed clear on the wall last year. BPL *will*
be started. The business folks are geared up for profits.
The President has made both BPL and Broadband a goal.
The good little Republican syncophants are synchronized
to The Word from on high.

BPL = Ban Pretentious Liberals?



It doesn't matter who wins a majority in the General Election.
BPL has started to deploy. Once it is IN, it becomes
legacy. Once the initial costs are taken care of, it is in the
regular profit time and the installers will fight tooth and nail
to keep it. The worm could turn.

With a legacy-status "utility" the BPLers could gain leverage
to actually STOP or cut down on all those nasty interfering
HF emitters...like amateur radio transmitters. Unknown, but
it is a spectre hovering in the background. Look at the troubles
some hams have in getting noisy electric power lines fixed.
Electric power distribution is very "legacy" by now and the
electric utility companies move slowly (if at all) on repairs.



Seriously, however, it is going to be interesting when BPL lines are found
adjacent to an active amateurs' property. BPL *will* be affected by rf.
Fire up your gallons.


Seriously, that's not a good idea. Hams are conditioned now
to be legal. Deliberate interference is illegal. It is much easier
to pull the tickets of a few hams doing deliberate interference
than it is to remove or reduce a legal deliberate interference
source in the form of BPL with government-accepted regulations.

Hoo, we are getting close to that strange discussion we had last year
with the fellow saying that if we know that it interferes, and we
transmit, we are purposely interfereing. That's enough to give a person
a headache!

But if a person is in a neighborhood with Access BPL, they won't need
to use that linear. Seems 100 watts will do just fine. I don't know the
frequency context of BPL/Amateur transmitter interference, but my guess
is that if you hear it on the band you are transmitting on, you'll do it
interference harm if you fire up.


All in all, though, the FCC has NO POWER to proactively stop
Access BPL now. At best all it can do is set the incidental
RF radiation levels and then enforce those. Or, wait about 30
years or so until BPL is truly legacy service and then, like
land telephony, start drafting more stringent regulations. In 30
years from now, few of us will be in a position to do much.




- Mike KB3EIA -