DickCarroll wrote:

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...
"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?




No, sounds accurate to me.



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.


As always,it's a $$$$$ thing, of course.

The National Association of Broadcasters has lobbied hard to keep hobby
broadcasting illegal, even on SW. They say that the AM and FM bands are
too crowded, and that's true, but SW is wide open. Of course they're
really concerned about innovative programming taking over market share.
If hobbyists were allowed on SW the radios would fly off shelves because
there'd finally be an alternative to automated corporate programming. (I
know for a fact that Clear Channel controls six or seven radio stations
in the San Francisco market, each carefully programmed as not to compete
with each other.)

In article ,
Frank Dresser wrote:
[snip]

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



Spread-spectrum is highly resistant to narrowband interference. BPL
develops wideband interference. What the military depends on is the
physics that any remote jammer trying to create wideband noise would need
to be immensely powerful, because a wide band of loud-at-a-distance noise
would have to have substantial energy at every frequency. BPL defeats
this by putting the transmitting antenna very near the receiver, so the
noise source need not be powerful to be loud at every frequency.
--

R F Wieland Newark, DE 19711-5323 USA 39.68N 75.74W
Icom R75 Heathkit GR-81 Inverted-L in the attic
Reply to wieland at me dot udel dot edu

"Robert F Wieland" wrote in message
...
In article ,


Spread-spectrum is highly resistant to narrowband interference. BPL
develops wideband interference. What the military depends on is the
physics that any remote jammer trying to create wideband noise would need
to be immensely powerful, because a wide band of loud-at-a-distance noise
would have to have substantial energy at every frequency. BPL defeats
this by putting the transmitting antenna very near the receiver, so the
noise source need not be powerful to be loud at every frequency.
--

R F Wieland Newark, DE 19711-5323 USA 39.68N 75.74W
Icom R75 Heathkit GR-81 Inverted-L in the attic
Reply to wieland at me dot udel dot edu


That's what I'd expect. But I don't know if the BPL system will dirty
enough, or close enough to significantly interfere with military
communications. I suppose the military has sent people out to take readings
like Ed Hare did. Anyway, I'm thinking the biggest threat to BPL isn't
outside opposition, but the spikey wideband trash normally found on power
lines.

That's it! BPL is a wives' conspiracy to get their husbands to start
vacuuming the freakin' carpet!

Frank Dresser

On Wed, 27 Aug 2003 09:57:46 +0000 (UTC), Ralph Aichinger
wrote:

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.


ARINC *has* filed comments. Apparently, one of their receive sites
near San Francisco was severely affected by some Part 15 equipment in
a house nearby. One of their 3 MHz frequencies was rendered unusable.

The NTIA will step up to bat for the military and government HF users.

Take care,

Dave

David Moisan, N1KGH, SKYWARN
Invisible Disability: http://www.davidmoisan.org/invisible_disability.html
GE Superradio FAQ: http://www.davidmoisan.org/faqs/supe.../gesr_faq.html
Sangean ATS-909 FAQ: http://www.davidmoisan.org/faqs/sangean/ats909faq.html