eHam.net - Amateur Radio (Ham Radio) Community

Call Search
     

New to Ham Radio?
My Profile

Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Speak Out
Strays
Survey Question

Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation

Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers

Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net


QSL Managers
     

Ham Links
     



[Articles Home]  [Add Article]  

Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?

Steven E. Matda (KE4MOB) on June 23, 2003
View comments about this article!


I recently read a posting on eHam where an amateur (a Life Member of the ARRL) complained to the ARRL leadership about a particular FCC rulemaking. Now mind you, we all tend to gripe when things don't go our way, but this struck me as kind of odd. Just out of curiosity, I proceeded to check the FCC Electronic Comment Filing System. The amateur in question hadn't filed a comment when the Notice of Proposed Rulemaking was posted. In fact, I can't find any comments filed by him on any rulemaking proceeding.

That's a real shame... he is missing out on some great opportunities to make his voice heard. He obviously had the time to write to the ARRL after the fact, and then took the time to draft a posting on eHam. But he didn't take the time to do what truly mattered by sending a message to the FCC. Now he is relegated to "crying over spilled milk".

Why did this happen? I think many hams are lulled into a false sense of security and think that the so-called "danger" isn't really as bad as it's made out to be -- or even worse there is the "somebody else will do it" attitude. Like in the above example, they believe that sending a check every year to the ARRL is enough. Nothing can be further from the truth. The ARRL shouldn't be called upon to bear the burden of presenting our ideas when it is so easy and painless to do as an individual. Sometimes one unified voice is good. More often than not, many tiny voices are better. But all too often we only get concerned after the fact and then our efforts are, well, useless.

Hams need to stop being procrastinators and realize that if we don't speak for ourselves, no one else will. I know a couple of hams that are both ARRL and NRA (Nation Rifle Association) members. It's interesting to see that the NRA can say, "Write your Representatives" and sure enough, the letters will be in the mail the next day. Oddly though, when the ARRL says "Write your Representatives" or "Send a comment to the FCC"... nothing ever happens. The "somebody else will do it" attitude kicks in!

Here's some numbers. So far, in the Broadband over Power Line Inquiry, approximately 625 hams have posted (and I suspect my estimate is high). That amounts to one-tenth of one percent of the US ham population. In the last Section Manager election in my state, 11% of the ham population in the state voted (amounting to probably 55% of the ARRL members if my estimates are correct)... and this was a hotly disputed contest!

So what are we waiting for? It's easy to "Monday Morning Quarterback". It's easy to "let someone else do it" and then criticize the outcome. And don't be lulled into letting your money do the talking for you... make a constructive contribution of your thoughts to enhance amateur radio. Write an article, make a comment to the FCC, give a presentation at a club meeting... you as an individual will be all the better for it, and so will ham radio.

Look at it this way... before someone gripes about a particular rulemaking, or the state of ham radio in general, he or she should ask a simple question: "Have I done anything to change this outcome?" If the answer is no, then with all due respect, you don't have much of a leg to stand on, do you?

Steve, KE4MOB

Member Comments:
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by W6YB on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Thats exactly what I noticed and what I felt.

73, Andrew W6YB
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by W8OB on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Nice article. I think the days of wine and rose's are over for many things besides ham radio. Its now down to scratching and clawing to keep what you have. Those that set back and do nothing are doomed much like the story of the grasshopper and the ant. Hopefully enough of these articles will make some people open their eyes.
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by W3RAZ on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I have my comment filed! :) In any case, I DO think the ARRL should be proactive and they are being that. BUT that is NO EXCUSE to not exercise our RIGHT to comment on law making. Some say that voting the next set of folks in office is their communication but I say no! We need to file our comments and the like as well. If you NEVER write your congressman or congresswoman about things, how are they supposed to know what the constituency wants? Lobbying groups like the ARRL are needed, but we need to be responsible citizens as well and we need to make our voice heard not just to the ARRL but to the FCC as well.
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KC2KUK on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I've filed my comment on BPL, but I don't know how one read the comments filed with FCC.

Where on the FCC site can one do that?
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KC8WCW on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I couldn't agree more. With regard to your comparison with the NRA however, I was struck by one thing in particular. Whenever you're discussing the topic of firearm ownership and our rights to keep and bear arms, there tends to be an immediate unity among those persons. Regardless of whether they're hunters, law enforcement, casual shooters, etc,,, they never have a problem sticking together with their common focus of retaining their rights.

My experience with Hams however, is that there is so much ego, infighting, and general lack of unity, that one could argue that Hams are their own worst enemy. Those who don't learn from history, are doomed to repeat it. When we're too busy fighting among ourselves to focus on a common goal, we've been defeated before we've even started. I've witnessed this same metality in too many instances in my life. With most issues like this, there eventually comes a point of no return. Often the most self proclaimed bigshots in their fields, are the same people who never see it coming. When it's all over, none of their "vast knowlege" will mean a whole bunch, will it?

Robert/KC8WCW
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by K0BG on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Yup! And I bet he complained about the President too, and I'd bet he never voted! In the words of the NRA, you get exactly what you aim for.

Alan, KØBG
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by VA3SLJ on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I would also like to take this opportunity to remind US citizens living outside the US (I am a US citizen, living and licensed in Canada), to file. You will probably have to do it through the mail, as the online system won't work if you cannot supply a US address.

Do mention that you are a US citizen. It is important to file, because if it happens in the US, it will happen elsewhere (especially Canada).

73's
Scott
VA3SLJ
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by AETHERBURNER on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Steve,

Your comparison of hams vs. NRA members could not have been more on target. I see that when the NRA speaks, its members listen and act. When the ARRL speaks, its members yawn. This is not an issue with the ARRL, it is the members and hams in general - most are just plain lazy, not up on issues, and "someone else will do it".

I bet that the FCC could pull 80/75m, 20m, and 2m from the Amateur Radio Service and the vast majority of hams out there would not realize that this happened until they get notices from the FCC that the bands are no longer available. Then they would whine to the ARRL screaming why did you let this happen. Then the League would say that we warned everyone we could but no one would put forth the effort to fight. This would be a great study for a paper in group dynamics between the two organizations. The sad part of this is that I see the same dynamics at club meetings and it happened at our club at the last meeting.

We chart our own group destiny and this just indicates that the group is dying because of apathy and laziness. Myself, I will be in there fighting tooth-and-nail to the end. I enjoy this hobby too much to let it die!

flames > /dev/null
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N3QT on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Ahmen...

Personally, I have too much invested in gear to allow the gear to become space heating, paper weights.

QSO discussions are fun, but GRIPE WHERE IT COUNTS!!!

TKS ES 73, John DE N3QT
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by ADMINISTRATOR on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I must belong to a different NRA, when laws are being formulated, stupid laws get passed and it is because far too many NRA members do not bother to write letters. The same holds true in the ham radio world.
I am a life member of the NRA as well as the ARRL for nearly 30 years to both and I have many changes to both hobbies, and the same lack of action happens in both hobbies.
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by AB5XZ on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Good question! I think we DO need a kick in the pants.

I've been watching the comments that hams are adding to the FCC's comment database, and it's clear that some hams don't understand what's at stake, nor do they understand what the FCC is asking.

The FCC, in Docket 03-104, has issued a "Notice of Inquiry", or NOI. This is the preliminary activity in which the Commission asks some questions, and invites comments from interested parties. Interested parties can also file "reply comments", in an attempt to rebut some of the original comments. Comments get about 45 days from publication date. Reply comments get about a month longer.

The next step, I think, will be a "Notice of Proposed Rule Making", or NPRM. In an NPRM, the Commission states its intention to make specific changes in its rules, and perhaps its reasons for those changes. Again, comments and reply comments are invited from interested parties. Comments get about 45 days from publication date, and reply comments get about a month longer.

The last step is the rulemaking itself, done in something called a "Report and Order". When the Report and Order is issued, the decision is final.

The FCC's NOI on Broadband over Power Line (or PLC or whatever) is open for comments for about two more weeks. It will be open for "reply comments" about a month longer than that.

Note that the comments are to come from "interested parties". You can bet that they won't come from "uninterested parties".

If HF radio (Amateur Radio or Short Wave Listening) is at all important to you, then you're an "interested party". Take the time to make YOUR opinion heard.

73TomAB5XZ
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KG6NXL on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
BPL should fail miserably as a technology because it is wasteful, spurious and insecure.

The fact that BPL occupies HF spectrum means that HF receivers can monitor and decode what are supposed to be private transactions. 128 bit encryption is strong, but not impervious to hacking. The public should know that their privacy will be compromised by anybody with knowledge and skill in receiving BPL transmissions.

Power lines are so lossy that great amounts of energy, far in excess of what would be required if fiber optic cable were used, will be heating the atmosphere but not accomplishing much else.

It is hard to imagine allowing spurious unidentified transmissions at such a gargantuan scale on spectrum that has been stringently regulated since the days following Marconi. If BPL can get away with spurious transmissions, why all the fuss about regulations for hams and other services?

Finally, this lame attempt at broadband for the masses is being proposed because the FCC and the Feds have failed miserably to bring fiber optic cable to the doorstep. It is estimated that an enormous percentage of existing fiber is now unused, after the bursting of the dot-com bubble. BPL is an easy way out for an administration that has neither the intelligence nor the vision to imagine a truly high-bandwidth, secure national backbone. As bad as the prospect of Al Gore as President may have been, he at least appreciated the need for an Information Superhighway.

BTU de KG6NXL (Nelson)
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N6TZ on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I agree fully with KG6NXL (see above). In my comments, I did not even mention that I was a Ham. I believe that our nickname carries very little weight with the FCC. I commented with the same approach as KG6NXL on the security of the BPL. And also, like Nelson said: Where is the fibre optic approach? That is the best system of all, and it has taken a very "back seat" for some reason........couldn't have anything to do with $$$ could it?
We have our hands full with this proposal, and I fear the outcome is going to be a problem. Like someone else said in one of these comments: "this country is supposed to be for the people, by the people, and of the people, but these days replace people with money".
Hal, N6TZ
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N1OL on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
From reading all of the background news reports and the FCC’s comments, they are clearly in a bind over Internet access. The RBOCs won’t extend DSL unless they have a monopoly (no line sharing). The FCC has met the RBOCs “part way” and still little progress. Ultimately the RBOCs are behaving as monopolies and there are huge barriers to entry for other players. Powell and his cohorts see BPL as a way to bring pressure on the phone companies and create competition. Trashing the shortwave as a by product is probably regarded as incidental. The FCC staff members must have told them of the consequences.

Hams need to take the message out, when a newspaper publishes an article, write a letter that explains why BPL is a really bad idea. Last Friday on Broadband reports hams were characterized “as sitting in basements and talking to themselves”. I responded and soon many other hams jumped in and addressed the issue. The resulting impression to the outsider was that BPL threatened a wide range of safety of life communications including transoceanic aircraft and was a failed technology.

I see many bumper stickers “I belong to the NRA and I vote”. If we are to protect our frequencies from theft we need to become politically active with a clear message that even a politician can comprehend. With the right focus and leadership we can make theft of our frequencies as attractive as picking up a rattle snake with an attitude problem.

FCC decisions have been revoked by Congress before, the LPFM radio initiative was stopped dead in it’s tracks by the NAB. See
http://www.beatworld.com/NAB/NABindex.html
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N1OL on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
What the lobbyists from the UPLC are saying for submission to the FCC.
View the original here;
http://www.uplc.utc.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/7966/conman/Bullet+Points+for+NOI.pdf

Suggestions for Comments on the Notice of Inquiry

The FCC Office of Engineering and Technology has initiated a Notice of
Inquiry (NOI) on Broadband over Power Line (ET Docket No. 03-104) that focuses on the technical rules that could/should apply in order to encourage its development and to protect incumbents from interference. The FCC has deliberately declined to address policy issues such as pole attachments, cross-subsidization and universal service in this proceeding. Instead, the NOI invites comment on specific issues that relate to BPL operations.

The United Power Line Council encourages utilities and other interested parties to submit comments in support of BPL. Comments in support of BPL will help the FCC properly balance the public interest in this technology. Comments are due July 7, 2003 and reply comments are due August 6, 2003.

BPL positions utilities to provide broadband to customers
Makes efficient use of existing infrastructure
Enables utilities to serve unserved/underserved areas

BPL promotes facilities-based competition
Offers alternative network for CLECs and ISPs
Price/performance will be competitive with incumbents
Existing broadband duopoly requires facilities-based competition that need not rely on telco/cable plant facilities to offer service.
Can subsequently offer competitive voice and video services

BPL enables utilities to implement Enhanced Power Distribution Services
Enhances utility services through the provision of load management, outage detection and automated meter reading and the introduction of time-of-day pricing
BPL provides last-mile high-speed access and home networking

Consumers get plug-and-play, always-on, symmetrical services at virtually every outlet

No street cuts necessary
No new in-home wiring or re-wiring necessary for in-home LAN capabilities

BPL creates economic opportunities
Encourages investment in equipment and technology
Spurs economic growth in related businesses (PCs, ISPs, manufacturing, etc) and creates jobs by building new broadband communications businesses

BPL improves infrastructure security/public safety
Provides a redundant communications network in the event of an outage/attack
Provides outage detection/management and remote distribution automation for critical power infrastructure
BPL supports video surveillance for public safety
Provides redundant/alternative backhaul for critical infrastructure and other communications networks, especially in remote areas where no existing telco facilities exist

BPL will not cause interference to licensed services
Part 15 emissions limits will continue to protect licensed services from interference and early BPL operations confirm that speculation about potential interference is unsubstantiated and unwarranted

The FCC should determine appropriate rule changes that can promote BPL development while still protecting licensed services from objectionable interference
BPL is in the public interest
Section 706 authorizes the FCC to accelerate broadband deployment by removing barriers to investment and to promoting competition. Adopting regulatory changes determined to spur the deployment of BPL does both – removes barriers to investment and hence promotes competition with cable and DSL.

Section 157 puts the burden on opponents of new technologies to show the new technologies are not in the public interest, and the FCC must make a public interest determination within one year from initiating a proceeding on a new technology or service.
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KL7IPV on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Being a member of both the ARRL & NRA, I write whenever I see a topic affecting me. The biggest difference I see between the ARRL and the NRA is the ease in which the NRA helps it's members along in the writing process. They provide names and addresses and e-mail address for people to write to. The ARRL gives a site to read the material but I haven't seen the additional info that would make it easier for members to write. Maybe I have just missed that. I also tried to use the FCC URL to make comments and it would not work. I tried three times and just did not continue. I know a written snail mail would also work but I did not do that. I was able to amend my license so I know how to navigate the FCC site. I also do NOT think I have enough real knowledge to convince the FCC that they are in error if they allow BPL. From what I DO know, the Part 15 protections would apply to us. It appears that the FCC is trying to create a universal "everyman's" web access and rather than wait for such a demand they are going ahead with it. In this case, the chance of interference aside; I do not know who is right in that regard. It is like HDTV; do the makers of the HDTVs wait until the demand is there or produce them and pray the demand comes along? It strikes me the BPL subject is another "chicken & egg" problem. In the meantime, I write to my legislators and hope they do what I believe to be correct. When they don't, I write again; but then the affect of writing is pretty much lost and a "boiler plate" reply comes in the mail.
73
Frank
KL7IPV
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N6AJR on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I too posted an article here a while back on this same subject, basically saying either become the squeky wheel by writing and filing, or become a member of the group (fcc, arrl, NRA...) and change it from the inside as a board member.. come on ladies and gentlemen, if you care about something, get off you butts and do something... tom N6AJR
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N1OL on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
The UPLC folks made it real easy to file comments – check out;
http://www.uplc.org/index.v3page?p=12311

In addition the UPLC came up with a list of suggested comments.

For a along time the ARRL home page didn’t even have a link to Ed’s page with all of the information.

Filing for the fist time can be intimidating but keep on trying, you can also search the comments – try putting in your zip code and see who else has filed in your town. Then get on the repeaters and get out the message.
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N4UJW on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Hello to all,
Yes Steve, a good swift kick planted dead center to those who have their head in the sand!
I spent lots of time building a page on my site some time ago pertaining to the threat to HF that Broadband over power lines will be to ALL HF operators and as of this posting, it has been seen 1469 times. Assuming that all 1469 "hits" sent in their comments to the FCC, there should be 1469 comments listed on the FCC site if no one else posted.....There are only 1146 comments to date (6-23-03)!
I even made it more simple by adding a page with a "picture" of the very easy form that is to be completed in order to file a comment. Only 16 hits on that page! Maybe those 16 were interested enough to see just what they had to do to file their comment and hopefully they joined the battle.
I have even had requests from a couple of hams that wanted me to file for them due to problems they were having with their computers. Email comments were received from them and I posted them to the FCC without problems IN THEIR NAME. Before any of you get any ideas.....please do not request me to do this for you, I simply do not have the time. It is so simple to file, even I could figure it out.
A suggestion I would have for those of you who would like to search the FCC comments site to see if your ham friend has made a comment would be to look up their call on a ham call database, get their full name, address, etc and use the section for searching comments with any or all the information you have on them. If you find that they have not commented.....give them that "SWIFT KICK IN THE PANTS" AND ASK THEM IF THEY NEED HELP GETTING THEIR HEAD OUT OF THE SAND AND IF NOT.....WHY?
Anyone is welcomed to take a look at the page on my site....Just copy and paste this link (www.hamuniverse.com/plc.html) read all about the battle...and use the links provided to make your comment directly to the FCC.
73 Don
N4UJW
www.hamuniverse.com
 
NRA-like Ham Bumper Stickers ?  
by K3NG on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Anyone want a "Jim Haynie is my President" bumper sticker ? How about "When 80 meters is outlawed, only outlaws will use 80 meters" ? Or "They can pry my Kenwood from my cold, dead fingers" ?

:-P
 
RE: NRA-like Ham Bumper Stickers ?  
by N1OL on June 23, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
To read filed comments go here;
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi

In the proceeding box (top left) enter 03-104.

Click the retrieve document list at the bottom of the form.

Next you will see a list of filings, the most recent first.
 
RE: NRA-like Ham Bumper Stickers ?  
by KL7IPV on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
N4UJW, I went to your site, here is what I sent:

I am concerned about the BPL proposal because of the potential for interference to my hobby as a radio amateur operator. I have just moved to a community that imposes restrictions on outside antennas and am limited to dipoles and similar types of antennas in my attic. If the BPL rules become law, then I fear that the interference that may be associated with the system will render whatever antennas I have useless. Beyond that, I haven't seen nor heard a great demand for additional broadband services for Internet access and wonder if this isn't something similar to HDTV where first a system is created hoping a demand will follow. I also wonder if once a system is allowed to be put in place, would the power companies then be allowed to boost the power to overcome other types of interference to their system rather than protecting the frequencies we use as amateur radio operators now. If the system does interfere with us as radio operators, would the FCC impose tighter restrictions upon the power companies to allow me to continue to use my radios? Would the use of MY radios have the same weight for protections as the power companies would have once the system is online? Please do not allow this to go into affect without further study and more stringent restrictions to protect the resources available to me now.

I hope that helps. Maybe others will do the same and the FCC will see we can express ourselves and wish the FCC to slow down on this proposal.
73
Frank
KL7IPV
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by WS4V on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Here's my comment I posted to the FCC:



As a long time radio enthusiast and shortwave listener I am writing in regards to the latest concern of BPL for future internet connections. While the idea of receiving and transmitting data via RF field over power lines sounds interesting and convenient I urge the FCC to re-examine the great potential and concern of major RF interference to a wide portion of the HF spectrum.
As the commission is well aware this radio spectrum is used by a number of services including military, amateur, astronomy facilities worldwide. It also is a basis for many scientific research.
The amount of interference levied on this frequencies would be overwhelming, to say the least.
Not only would receivers in this spectrum be overwhelmed with interference but potentially a vast number of consumer electronics could be affected including basic AMFM receivers, televisions, baby monitors, surveillance equipment and cameras, garage door units and more.
In particular, for my hobby interest, ham radio communication would be greatly curtailed. Recent findings and speculations suggest interference peaking at S9 +30 db on the frequencies that radio amateurs use. This would all but eliminate any reasonable communication capabilities locally and worldwide.
As you are aware the amateur radio community exists still today as an important outlet to communication when all other forms of communication (cellular and landline telephone, facsimile, internet, etc.) is interrupted or “down.”
In particular its use during the hurricane season is monumental and crucial. Communities devastated by the ravages of a hurricane have no other way of contacting family members and proper authorities without ham radio.
As well many religious organizations, charity outfits and worldwide benevolence programs use and rely strictly on ham radio and ham radio phone patch communications for worldwide transmissions.
The military amateur radio service also serves an important role in today’s world and, with the advent of homeland security measures, may serve a greater role in the future.
For many “hams,” though, the true joy and thrill of communications on the HF or high frequency bands means a great deal. Many friends have been made worldwide through ham radio and it still serves as a way of bridging the gap between cultures—something that perhaps may help one another understand each other a little better.
By exposure of our bands to high power, high energy BPL transmissions for convenient computer usage many services, amateur, government, non-profit and more will be completely “wiped out.”
I also wonder about the risk of harmonics created by this service and the potential for BPL transmissions to run rampant on much higher frequencies, too—a threat that could really encroach on hospital paging systems, medical transport units and more.
Reports from other countries using BPL widely have shown major interference concerns to the ham radio community and others.
Environmentally, too, I wonder what the effects of long term, continuous BPL RF energy. What are the effects of exposing individuals? What happens if this system does interfere with devices and a number of frequencies not only in the HF spectrum but elsewhere? Also, what about the concerns to the AM broadcast band? What about US BPL interference to other countries? As for the AM band, surely, interference could occur here, too since it is right below the 160 meter band. The AM band is an important band for news and entertainment for millions.
I please ask the commission to reconsider the BPL issue and look for alternatives to safe internet communications. As a radio ham, I implore you to investigate further. Ham radio is a very important part of my life. Over a million in the United States couldn’t agree more—not to mention the millions and millions of worldwide hams.
Many of us have also invested a lot of our time, education and money into ham radio. It would be a shame to see such a wonderful hobby dissipate from this new technology.
Thank you for your time and consideration.

 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KG6AMW on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Those who posted their inital comments opposing PLC will help our cause. Please review the latest information from the ARRL on this matter. The next go around with reply comments and if it comes, the proposed rule making file will require you guys to do some serious writing both on the subject at hand and to your congressmen. You should start preparing now for the next phase. I have.

KG6AMW
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by AB5XZ on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
N1OL, thanks for posting the UPLC information.

The scary part of this is the last bit of UPLC's "Bullet Points".

• BPL will not cause interference to licensed services
o Part 15 emissions limits will continue to protect licensed services
from interference and early BPL operations confirm that speculation
about potential interference is unsubstantiated and unwarranted
• The FCC should determine appropriate rule changes that can promote
BPL development while still protecting licensed services from
objectionable interference
o BPL is in the public interest
o Section 706 authorizes the FCC to accelerate broadband
deployment by removing barriers to investment and to promoting
competition. Adopting regulatory changes determined to spur the
deployment of BPL does both – removes barriers to investment and
hence promotes competition with cable and DSL.
o Section 157 puts the burden on opponents of new technologies to
show the new technologies are not in the public interest, and the
FCC must make a public interest determination within one year
from initiating a proceeding on a new technology or service.

The statements about non-interference are specious (that's lawyerese for "untrue").

In particular, the Section 157 citation is chilling. It tells me that hams and other users of HF spectrum now have to show that BPL deployment is not in the public interest. I wish the FCC gave us the same kind of protection when we want to put up towers!

73TomAB5XZ
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N1OL on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I have looked through the comments filed with the FCC and read the Commissioner's statements. My concern is that many of our comments do not answer the questions of the NoI. Fundamentally the main question is HOW should BPL be implemented, not IF?

The FCC Commissioners have already stated that claims of interference are “unsubstantiated”. Stating that BPL interferes without submitting proof that it does, could lead to the comment being viewed as another “unsubstantiated” comment.

Ultimately (in my view) BPL is not a problem providing;
1) Signal levels are chosen so it does not interfere with licensed users.
2) Systems ID so that problem systems can be quickly located.

The first point has already been carefully researched in Europe and the BBC has published two carefully prepared research papers that document the signal levels from BPL that do not cause interference. The papers are here;
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp-pdf-files/WHP012.pdf
http://www.bbc.co.uk/rd/pubs/whp/whp-pdf-files/WHP004.pdf
Note; I emailed Ed Ware the links but they have not turned up on his page – Ed if you read this, please add the files.

System ID would be a simple 5wpm Morse call sign every five minutes.

I made these comments in my submission, if you think these comments are useful, please use them in your submission. If you think they can be improved – say so.

Note you can also send additional supporting documentation with your comment as the system allows you to upload more than one file.

Key is we are working with the FCC to a common goal that echoes their comments and should the FCC fail to implement a pollution free BPL system it will be a lot easier to take to Congress as we proposed a viable solution to the problem and are not standing in the way of progress.
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by K3UD on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
I think there are several reasons why there are relatively few comments to the FCC.

1. Based on postings around the internet and what I hear discussed on the air (very little discussion actually), It seems that there is a feeling that this is a done deal because it is going to please some big money interests, and you just can not fight them.

2. Another reason is the feeling that this is the ARRL's problem and they should take care of it.
After all, 'this is what we pay membership dues for'.

3. Believe it or not, it is likely that an overwhelming percentage of licensed hams in the US no nothing about the issue. The ARRL only reaches about 30% of the ham population. Many licensed hams are inactive.

4. Some hams do not understand the issue enough to feel comfortable in posting.

I posted my comments sometime back and I wish there were 10,000 comments up there instead of the 900 or so that were posted.

73
George
K3UD
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by N1OL on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
The filing process is intimidating, and there has been little help on this from any amateur source. The UPLC lobbyists put together an excellent “portal” for submitting comments with suggestions as to what comments were made.

There has been almost complete failure to involve other HF users (SWL etc.) in responding.

Think 30% of hams knowing about this is optimistic – rarely hear any comment on the bands.

The ARRL is what we make it, shame on anyone who is not a member.

This is only a done deal if we let it be a done deal, key is that all the issues are brought up in front of the FCC in a way that they cannot be dismissed as “unsubstantiated”. If the FCC ignores clearly presented evidence then an appeal is very viable.

World wide there are only 16,000 PLC users and the PLC lobby is denying any interference issues exist. The PLC lobby is burning money and failing to gain any real traction, their PR sounds ever more desperate by the day. DSL and Cable gain customers and pay down investment as each day goes by.

The US is PLC’s last hope, like the washed out gambler putting his last dollars in a Vegas airport slot machine.

 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KG4PIL on June 24, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
We tend to take things for granted, i'm afraid.
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by K0RFD on June 26, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Well, I filed my comments today. I hope that everyone who posts here spends as much effort commenting to the FCC on this proposal as they do arguing their positions here on other matters.

Maybe BPL is a "done deal" -- but if we don't file our comments, we can't hope to influence whether the "deal" is "done" without disruption to our Service.
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by HAMESCHEESE on July 3, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Kick me in the jimmy!
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by AB5XZ on July 6, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
An interesting comment has been filed on behalf of the IEEE Protective Relaying Standards Committee.

As I read it, the comment dismisses Chairman Powell's claim that BPL will improve the safety of the power grid.

Another point made in the comment is this (I paraphrase):

The bridging circuits that allow RF (the broadband signals) to bypass a transformer will also allow noise from your vacuum cleaner (or other noisy motor) to bypass it, and thereby propagate motor noise everywhere.

This suggests to me that the US (FCC) rules that designate some devices as FCC Class A and B computing devices will need to be revised, since the operating environment will change (if BPL is implemented).

Anyway, I am very glad to see the good comments from the IEEE committee.

73TomAB5XZ
 
Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by WA2JJH on July 16, 2003 Mail this to a friend!
Steve, I usually agree with your positions in such matters.

However lets fsce a cold fact, HAM radio is becoming an obscure hobby! With internet, P.C.'s, cell phones and the like.

There are more hams than ever before.


OK the comparision with the NRA. The NRA is a REAL WASH D.C. lobby. GUNS will always provoke an argument.
Even as guns progress from bullets to directed energy weapons....GUNS will always be hot and in the publics mind!

I think technology and the times has kicked us in the butt!

Used to be the HAM radio operator was the town electronics GURU, and a pillar of the community.

I guess when the CB craze hit in 1975 with that convoy song, Ham radio does not have the gee whiz factor it used to have!

Where we might use a kick in the pants is the Ham radio operator stereotype.

Ya know
1)White, overweight, smelly, and many other negitive remarks from fellow hams!

I guess we are kind of like the ultra audiophiles that spend upwards of 10,000 for a stereo system.(TUBES OF COURSE!)

I think we all have been kicked in the pants enough!
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by AE1X on July 1, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
To W3RAZ,

"Lobbying groups like the ARRL are needed"

The ARRL is barred from lobbying activities by its charter. They do not lobby as such. They provide professional testimony and technical guidance when the situation begs as in this case and many others. We must do our own lobbying or set up an appropriate lobby ourselves outside of ARRL.

The best comments to the FCC are those that have truely spelled out the technical and operational arguments for or against any rule making by the commission. Simple comments posted in opposition are okay, but not enough.

Communications with your federal representation is a good idea. Be sure to be reasonable in your comments. Emotional comments will only drive the officials in the wrong direction.

I can tell you that I have done all of the things mentioned in this article at one time or another, most recently corraling my Congressman's people at a weekly local gathering in the center of the City, calling the Massachusetts delegation at their offices, sending email to all including the President, and filing comments and reply comments in the case of ET Docket 04-37. I would encourage all of my colleagues to promote these actions. We need to get on the RADAR Screen of Congress!

Ken, AE1X
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by W2YEE on November 25, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Sending email to the president can be considered a terrorist act as defined by DHS. Please think twice about doing this and be sure not to use any language that would be confrontational or provocative.

Walter
 
RE: Do We Need a Kick in the Pants?  
by KA2FIR on December 5, 2004 Mail this to a friend!
Walter,

Do u have a 55' crankup on a corner house? I was told that your a silent key?

73,

Mike KA2FIR
 
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.

Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help

Related News & Articles
Manassas Virginia BPL Update:
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
HPL is Coming to an Outlet Near You!
NTIA Claims BPL Could Help Alleviate Power Line Noise:
Amateur Radio BPL Team to Stress Credibility:


Other Editorial Articles
My First Memory
The SB Project
Hamming It Up, The Early Years
A Hobby from a Hobby
Managing Ham Radio Estate Sales