Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
ken cubilo (W8OB)
on
June 21, 2003
View comments about this article!
As time runs out to file comments on the FCC NOI BPL proposal I have to wonder where are all the comments from the Hams who hang out on this site and others. You see sometimes-heated debates here from hams with passionate beliefs and the constant beating of dead horses, but why is not some of this energy being channeled over to try and kill this BPL thing before it gets started. On this date 6/12/03 there are 859 comments filed on 03-104 that is less than .1 of 1 percent of the licensed hams in the U.S. If this wonderful answer to Internet access via the power lines takes off ham radio, as you know it today is cooked. Most all frequencies from 2 MHz to 80 MHz are subject to very bad noise 24/7 and that's not taking harmonics into account, which could easily raise the upper frequency limits well into the VHF spectrum.
Where are comments from out beloved radio makers? Kenwood, Icom, Ten-Tec, Yaesu and others... Where are comments from our organizations that we pay dues to and the monthly rags? So far the ARRL is the only organization I have seen make mention of this and start putting together papers on it. CQ and Popular Communications seem to have their heads stuck in the sand on this one. Listen we all have to stick together on this one and get busy before its too late, don't leave it up to the other guys. Tell the CB guys and freebanders about this proposal also (Political battles make strange bedmates). Put aside the squabbles for a few minutes and file an online comment against this proposal.
(More information on this issue can be found at:
http://www.eham.net/articles/5769 -- ed.)
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N6AJR on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I can't speak for any one else but I have sent several emails to approiate places ( as set up in the last 2 articles on this subject) and hope the bill goes down. You have to make it point and click easy for most folks to do it. 73 tom N6AJR
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KD7VKB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I know I put my 2 cents worth in. I'm very new to this hobby and the last thing I want is to have someone force potential interference before I've had the chance to really enjoy HF!!!
73, Doug, W7MEX
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K0RGR on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have sent my comments to FCC and also brought this up at our local club meeting so that the club would get the word.
I'm still hoping that there might be room for some kind of technical compromise that would prevent interference to HF. If this operates from 2 to 80 Mhz, why not limit it to 30-50 or 30-80 with lots of filtering at 6 meters?
I don't often find myself on the same side as the environmentalists, but here, we're really fighting another potential form of pollution.
I would be really interested in hearing first-hand accounts from hams living in the areas where this is being tested. On paper, this stuff looks like an HF killer, but maybe in practice it won't be that bad, so long as FCC adopts responsible rules.
Unfortunately, the words of the NOI and the comments of the majority of the Commissioners, make it clear that the purpose of the NOI is to find ways to PREVENT FCC regulations from interfering with the growth of this new technology, not to protect the radio services involved.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WA4PTZ on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Obviously you don't understand US politics. He who
has the most money has the most control. The Electric
Power Industry has plenty. We gave them a free ride
with the Rural Electric Act and they have done what-
ever the hell they've wanted ever since. And I ask
you are we not supposed to be a government "of the
people, by the people and for the people" ?
I believe the word "money" has replaced "people".
73 - Tim
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KC9DYN on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I am still a tech class operator that plans on upgrading to general and then extra someday, so here is the link to make our comments heard, http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/
73's KC9DYN
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K3IVB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
This is just like when they deregulated telephone service allowing competition, not a word was spoken against it until everyone’s phone bill first doubled then tripled, by that time it was a fact of life and no amount of outcry mattered, we now all pay ridiculous telephone phone costs in the name of competition. This new internet technology will not stop there, we all will be taxed so everyone including welfare recipients will have access to the internet because some bureaucrats were paid off by corporate America. Gee maybe this is the beginning of the new world order where not everyone wanting to become an amateur will be able to, you will be chosen. Apathy, will one day make us all into drones and slaves under the ones holding the money bags and the ones not afraid to speak out will control your life.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W8OB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To file a comment on this proposal go to:
Http://www.fcc.gov/cgb/ecfs/
click on submit a filing
proceeding # is 03-104
Please do it today thanks
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AC5E on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Well - before you file a comment check out this week's (June 20, 2003) ARRL Letter for some talking points. And remember these are bureaucrats you are talking to. Be brief, to the point, and above all respectful.
My dad always told me to respect anyone with a badge on his chest and a gun on his hip. The bureaucrats who will decide the case should get the same respect. You can say what you want in private but even the slightest hint of rudeness to the almighty bureaucrat is likely to backfire.
Remember what happend to the woman who told the IRS agent he had the brains of a pork chop? Let her case be a warning to everyone who must deal with the gummitup.
73 Pete Allen AC5E
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W4TYU on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have not comented because I do not know enough about the technical aspects to say anything except "I am against anything that will increase interference". That is not an intelligent and well thought out comment and would only increase the comception of amateur radio operators held by some.
W4TYU
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W8OB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
As mentioned above go to the ARRL's website. http://www.arrl.org. You will see a notice Attention radio amateurs. Its a very well put together article about BPL by Ed Hare. He also explains what you should stress in your comment. This whole filing process only takes a couple of minutes to do. In this article you will also find .wav files from European and Asian countries where BPL was tested showing massive QRM to HF rendering it all but useless. So far tests of BPL systems in the U.S. seem to be confined to small areas with towns I have never heard of ( most likely not a ham op with miles). You know that picture ad in QST that shows all the ham gear with cobwebs on it and the caption " this didn't have to happen", while this BPL thing could make that come all too true. Also as mentioned above be diplomatic in comments, I have seen a couple of them filed that called the FCC idiots, such comments cause this fight to take a giant step backwards. remember one aw s--t cancels 10 atta boys.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AA4PB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Most of us do not have any direct experience with BPL. Those in test areas and those in other countries where it is in use could probably give us some excellent help by making some direct comments to the FCC about how it affected your operations.
For the majority, what we can do is make our point to the FCC about how it would impact our use of ham radio if it did cause interference. Some of us have negative experiences with the RFI generated by existing power lines and lack of assistance from the local power companies in resolving it. We can make those points to the FCC.
I think that it would help a little just to let the FCC know that you are concerned about the potential interferrence. I don't buy the thinking that there is nothing you can do because the power companies have all the money. Government agencies do often respond to public opinion and the mere fact that you are concerned enough to voice your concerns to them counts for something. If you don't comment then you have essentially told the FCC that it doesn't matter to you one way or the other so the only input they get is from the power companies.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KB2SSA on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think all your fears are unfounded. Do you want to know if it will cause interference??? Go to the computer store and buy 2 POWERLINE ETHERNET ADAPTERS for $80 each, plug them in your shack see what happens!
It is here and it is going to stay. We should be happy that they are doing a WIRED approach to this rather than stealing more spectrum for wireless services.
Dont look a gift horse in the mouth!
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Good job Ken. I also wondered what happened to the SWL organizations, ham clubs, radio astronomy groups, equipment manufacturers, and et al. So far it been individuals who have responded.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KC0OYY on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have to side with those who do not want to see internet provided on the power lines for a number of reasons other than what has been stated so far.
One of formost thoughts is that this mode is a mode that will be out dated in less than two years. I say that because of the rapid change in technology we hasve seen in the past five years. I can see all internet and phone calls going by way of wireless. Cell phones and internet conections have grown behond what was thought even five years ago.
I am a Ham to the core. We are the pioneres of telecommunation. We have shown though every creative Hams what we do for OUR HOBBY. Look at EME, and all the Microware work Hams have done and do,not to leave out PSK, or Packet.
KC0OYY..
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K7CSM on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I sent a response to the FCC. I doubt if it did any good. How can I write my senators and congresman so they understand and might be willing to get involved? I'm not sure they would understand PBL and our technical language.
Tom Detchemendy, K7CSM-The Lead Sled Dog
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AA4PB on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> I can see all internet and phone calls going
> by way of wireless.
Unfortunately it seems to be headed in that direction. It's another instance of poor management that is more interested in short term dollars than the long term conservation of resources. Why use up a limited resource (RF spectrum) to provide a service that could go via an unlimited resource (fiber optic cable)? One fiber optic cable to your home could provide broad band Internet access, telephone, and cable TV. No RFI, and much better protected against lightning than copper. Only one reason I can think of - in the short term its cheaper to stick up another radio tower than to burry or string miles of fiber.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W4VR on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If you look at the record to date on this BPL matter, the only folks opposing it are the ARRL and it's constituents. The Federal Government and it's agencies have millions of frequency assignments in the HF spectrum and is therefore the largest user of HF; it has given its blessing for BPL to go forward. With this in mind, I don't believe the amateur community can kill a proposed system that has already been supported by other entities and FCC as being the greatest thing since sliced bread.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
UnderSecrtary Victory only gave the
Administration's "blessing" if it does
NOT interefere with HF users.
Better read her letter again!
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N3RIK on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Maybe consumers will be the ones to put this system down. By the time the utility companies figure out a system and get it up and running-flawlessly, the system will probably be obsolete!
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KG4RUL on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a medium voltage power line running through my yard and 25 feet from my antennas. If this is implemented, and everything is maintained 'technically perfect', I am still SCR#WED, BIG TIME!!!! Their field strength measurements are made at 30 meters. That leaves me about 70 feet too close!
I have already sent out my comments, and of course, I will be listened too. Aanybody want to buy a nice bridge? Real cheap! Goes from NY to Brooklyn.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N4DFP on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I have FINALLY added my "2 cents" worth. And I may have an answer as to why more haven't. I have been trying for almost 2 months to post my comment, but I kept getting transfer errors. I am not suggesting a conspiracy, but a woefully inadequate server on the ECFS site. Please, keep trying. Perseverance pays off.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N4EKV on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I recently read that the FCC received over 750,000 written comments -- 99% of them 'against' -- the recent action to liberalize media ownership. The matter passed anyway so it makes you wonder if they even consider public opinion. Given the revenue they receive from commercial spectrum licenses (billion$) compared to what they receive from amateur radio (peanuts) it's clear to me where this will end up.
Still, it doesn't hurt to try. And yes, I have already filed my comments on 03-104.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Little Mikie only has two supporters
on the Senate Committee that does over sight
on the FCC, McCain (R-AZ), the Chairman, and
Allen (R-VA). They called him in last week
over the media owner ship issue. They
chastised him and promptly
passed a bill out to over turn the decision.
I think Frist (R-TN) will bring it to the
floor and it will pass.
Anybody know what support Little Mikie has
in the House?
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N3NL on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This BPL issue is definitely an uphill fight.
After all, the electric utilities easily killed off
the proposed amateur radio allocation on 135.7 to
137.8 kHz. Everyone had the impression that this
"sliver band" proposal was going to pass.
Still it is better to make rational and thoughtful
comments to the FCC than to just give up. The more
facts you can put into your comments the better.
Also, I am concerned about the BPL impact on decameter
radio astronomy (15 MHz to 50 MHz) used to study
Jupiter and the Sun and the BPL impact on the
student radio astronomy of the NASA-assisted
Radio JOVE project. I have written letters to the
radio astronomy people suggesting that they
comment on docket ET 03-104. Similarly I have
written to short wave radio listening people and
to CB people about this. Military Afiliate Radio
Service operations are similarly impacted. (My
comments are on file with the FCC too.)
So lets cheer up and send in our comments to the FCC.
It is time to speak now for the future of amateur
radio operation and achievement.
73, Nickolaus E. Leggett, N3NL
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by G3SEA on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Not Guilty M'Lud ! :)
I have sent several posts to appropriate areas plus one on the FCC Complaint / Comment site.
If this interference is as bad as claimed I will have to operate / MM ! :)
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KX8N on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"If this interference is as bad as claimed I will have to operate / MM ! :)"
The part I notice here is the word "claimed". I'm waiting to hear from hams who have actually sat in their shack and experienced interference first hand from BPL, before I comment one way or the other. It just seems like everything so far is "so and so said that..." How many hams have actually experienced anything in the test areas?
Not trying to be negative or anything, I'd just like to know and see what they have to say about it.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W3ZV on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Correct me if I am wrong, but to me it seems that the NOI asks two questions. One is Does Part 15 have to be expanded to accommodate BPL? and the second is What measurement standards need to be developed to measure BPL's radiation potential?. That sounds to me like the issue of whether it should exist or not has already been decided. Are we too late?
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W3NTD on June 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks for waking me up. I have added a comment about this subject.
Tnx 73 W3NTD
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K1CJS on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yes, the comments requested are supposed to be concerning changes to part 15 regarding power levels. But hopefully if enough people reply regarding stopping it altogether, final decisions may be put off until further studies are made. Hi hi.
Just for the heck of it, (I think this was mentioned earlier in these comments) Japan has stopped implementation of BPL technology because of its inherent interference to radio frequencies.
My club has a leaky cable feedpoint junction near our repeater (2 meter) and I'll tell you, the harmonics play h*ll with our input frequency even with filters and other fixes we have tried including PL tones. Just imagine harmonics like that on unshielded lines! And yes, I included that on my comment to the FCC.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by NN7B on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Comments on this subject to the FCC *MUST* be "informed" comments. Just saying this BPL stuff will mess up all of my radio communications isn't going to get noticed. You need to include FACTS stating your reasoning for your position. Otherwise, you're just another complainer making noise. I am not very well informed on the subject so, I have not voiced a simple opinion since it will be little more than wasted time. - Paul
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K1WCC on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My comment was simple-there are users of the frequency spectrum who may be adversely impacted by this(inevitable)technology. Please ensure controls are in place to see that such users are protected.
I also think that power companies should have a method in place to block these signals from entering the homes of those who don't intend to use it.
--------------------------------------------------
This technology is already in place in parts of Europe, other places have banned it. It would be interesting to hear from hams living in affected areas.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W5GD on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks for the reminder. In this busy, busy world I sometimes put things off until it's too late. Just filled a comment with the FCC and it wasn't hard to do at all.
I agree that everyone who holds an amateur license should make a comment. After the power companies killed the 136khz VLF proposal, they should understand the potential interferance BPL would cause. We could probably use some of the very same arguments they used to shoot down the low band proposal to stop BPL.
73's
Steve, W5GD
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WB1FPA on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
When, in the US of A, a Federal employee is prohibited from working in the industry that he/she regulates for some period of time after no longer in the employ of the US of A government, then I'll take commenting on NOI's seriously. Until then, just follow the $. Someone is going to have a beautiful office after this is 'regulated' into existence. I'll bet they work for the citizens of the USA right now, & could just possibly be someone in the Commission that 'regulates' radio?
Remember, this same Commission recently asked for comments as to whether they should regulate RFI susceptability on receivers in the USA. Regulate? Why not just adopt the EU codes that have been in place for many years?????
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W2LJ on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
For all of you who are rather cynical and blase' about this issue ... I would suggest you check out these three URL's.
http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/030103-PLC_Video_Fulpmes.wmv
http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/plc_video_linz.rm
http://www.darc.de/referate/emv/plc/plc_video_tirol.rm
These three videos were made by the Austrian equivalent of the ARRL. And it shows the effect on reception where they already have this stuff. This is scarey guys!
Larry W2LJ
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W4VR on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WA4MJF states "UnderSecrtary Victory only gave the
Administration's "blessing" if it does
NOT interefere with HF users."
That statement from the Federal side is BS. Once a system of this magnitude goes into being and lots of dollars were spent, they will not shut it down because of interference to HF users...we'll have to live with the interference as we did with other devices permitted on a secondary basis in the HF bands over the years. As someone else stated on this thread, "the only thing that will kill this system is if they go bankrupt."
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
No, not BS, when she speaks, it is if Andy Card
or Dubya gave the FCC guidance. You can
bet if it itereferes with their HF comms
(USCG, DOD, DOJ, FAA, etc) they will
make sure that it shuts down.
While technically, Little Mikie and his
cohorts don't have to take direction
from the Administration, they are beholdin'
to them for their reappointment or
they might have to get real jobs.
Heck, if it interferes too much with US
Government HF
commo, he may even loose the support of McCain
and Allen.
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N1OL on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Below is my proposed response to the FCC – please advise any improvements or changes
Tnx
David
N1OL
I have been closely involved on both a professional and hobby basis with radio technology since 1970 and the Internet since 1994. In addition I am a licensed radio amateur holding the Extra class call sign of N1OL.
The HF radio spectrum is used by a very diverse selection of users both here in the US and overseas. Some users depend on reliable HF communication for safety and interference with HF communications could potentially put people’s lives in jeopardy.
To enable new technologies to become established the FCC has implemented part 15, almost all existing part 15 devices radiate from a single location and in the event of a problem are easily identified. A case in point was the recent tracking of interference to air traffic control from a baby monitor. BPL will radiate from multiple locations and the interference will be similar to “white noise” and difficult to locate if interference occurs. To enable the tracking of interference from BPL, a 5 wpm Morse ID could be added to the BPL bit steam so that the source of interference can be rapidly identified without needing complex decoding equipment.
BPL (called PLC in the UK) was first introduced in Manchester U.K. in 1997 and the FCC may find it useful to review two reports prepared by the BBC in the UK that carefully examines the signal levels at which BPL systems can successfully operate with causing interference.
The two reports can found 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
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AETHERBURNER on June 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I sent in my $0.02 cents worth on this. On my trip to Dayton this year, I had S-8 noise in my Jeep from power lines until I left Wisconsin and arrived in Northern Illinois where there are no power lines to be seen except for trees and the background noise dropped many S-units. What makes the power companies think that they can keep in the BPL signals when they can't even keep in the current noise on the power lines? I guess it's the sheer arrogance of the almighty dollar. This is a side but it would not surprise me that if this does pass and the power companies start putting in the BPL equipment that the non-users of BPL will have to foot the increase in infrastructure cost even though they are not reaping the benefits of using the service.
73,
Richard
|
| |
|
COMMENT ADDED!
|
|
|
by LNXAUTHOR on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
- add me to the list! i just posted my comment...
- it took three tries with one timeout, but i got my
confirmation that the comment was accepted...
- only took a minute or so, folks, so get your comment
in!
- thanks for the timely tip!
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K7ENP on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hello About this PBL they did this in 1928
over the power lines GE i belive was the first.
How to stop it not sure Get all radio mfg to
start a petition for every ham to sign or vise
versa ,Amateurs to head up a national petition?
Jerry Webster QCWA licnsed 1958 email
k7enpjerry@comcast.net
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KG6NXL on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Frankly, what could have been a simple email comment registry system has been transformed by the FCC into a Byzantine formal process, which one should expect from a bureaucracy. Perhaps most people who don't know the details of pasting HTML text into messages are intimidated by this formality? It seems to me to be discriminatory in the extreme, because it allows comments to be made only by those who own or know how to use computers, and who have above average skills!
So, we can criticize our brother and sister hams all we like, but as long as Big Brother government throws subtle roadblocks in the way of our attempts to communicate, only the wealthy, educated minority will be heard.
BTU de KG6NXL
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KF6JZC on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It may be too late to submit. I just tried and this is what I got back.
Proceeding 03-104 is not open for submission to ECFS.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N1OL on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Looks if the VIC-20 they are using for gullflossy needs a reload (cassette tapes do take time).
Maybe those awfully nice folks at the UPLC will donate a C-64!!!
Try back later.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N6TZ on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I filed my comments a couple of weeks ago, but I did not even mention that I am a Ham. My comments were based on the idea that if it radiates on the power lines then it does not offer much security for the users. Does anyone know about this aspect? In other words if you pass along your private information while making a purchase on the web, can this be available to anyone monitor those local feed lines? I have seen where there are monitors available right now that pick up information that is just flowing in your cable or lines. So how does this security facet play in the cards??
Hal, N6TZ
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by W3DCG on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thanks for reminding everyone.
I filed another comment.
My second comment.
Indeed it sounds like, if BPL prevails, it would be like closing the gates of Avalon.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by SOOTHSAYER on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Japan was able to combat this technology because their greed does not reach the extent of our own. US corporations, backed by our government, dropped Agent Orange on our troops in Vietnam, placed infantry men 1 mile from the first nuclear detonations, allowed radioactive fallout to rain upon the southwest areas to the extent that it has affected our beef which is consumed by our citizens. There is no concern for our welfare, but for the welfare of profit. US corporations buy out the FDA, the law and the politicians every day. Who says they can't buy out the FCC as well? We have the right to scream our heads off, but if we start being heard and making changes, we mysteriously vanish or somehow wind up in an IRS audit. BPL? If it makes money, you can bet the lobbyist for the telecommunications corporations will win no matter how many millions of votes come in against BPL. Prove me wrong! Submit as many comments to the FCC you can, and keep count. In the end you will see that 70,000 or 1,000,000 comments can't buy out the percs of a lobbyist checkbook. I love amateur radio. I really do, and I will saddened when it is eliminated. I will be more angry though as it seems that Animal Farm is now more a reality in THIS country then in the old cold war Soviet State.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N1OL on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You vote, you can write, write a letter today to your Congressman explaining that the FCC considering allowing a gross polluting technology call BPL (Broadband Power Line).
State that; BPL could interfere with shortwave communications by our Military, passenger aircraft, broadcasters, and our first responders in emergencies the amateur radio community.
Add that; Japan ran in depth tests and the result caused them to instantly ban this technology. The Finish government has also banned BPL due to the concerns about interference.
Note that; you have read Commissioner Powell’s comments on BPL and it is clear that he has failed to consider the issues.
Request that; your Congressman looks into this issue as you strongly feel that the FCC is in dereliction of their duty.
Embellish and add your words, fax, email and snail mail copies.
Post back here as inspiration to other folks.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AD7DB on June 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I did mine tonight. I looked at some of the other comments; many of them are just one paragraph. But I guess brevity is a virtue. You don't have to write something the size of the latest Harry Potter novel there, just give them the facts and your opinion.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WS4V on June 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here's my comment 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."
Please, go the the website. Write up a comment in your Word Perfect program, save it and paste it over to the FCC for examination.
The file system is a bit intimidating at first.
Just type in 03-104 with your information.
Send the saved file you used to their comment box area and send it.
We all need to do this. Ham radio is too important for it to go away!
73 to all!
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N2KMF on June 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Another thing to consider: If this is radiating on HF, won't that interference escape our boundaries and in effect shut down HF communications to a large extent in this hemisphere? While a few scattered systems (like they have in Europe) might not contribute a great deal to the background noise, if BPL becomes widespread in the US I can see the possibility that other countries might be seriously effected. Think of it like snow: You can't hear an individual snowflake hit the ground, but when it is snowing hard you can hear an audible hiss. This has international implications that we should be pointing out. I'm going to make sure I point this out in my comments.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by AG4RQ on June 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I just filed my comments to the FCC:
"BPL poses a significant threat to the Amateur Radio Service and to every other radio service that uses frequencies between 2 and 80 MHz. Amateur Radio is vital to our nation's Homeland Security. Hams provide vital communications during and after disasters, be they hurricanes, wildfires, floods, earthquakes, tornados or terrorism. When the normal methods of communications are down or unusable, hams provide the necessary communication to prevent loss of life. Even though most of this communication is on VHF, there is still emergency communication on HF. Often during a disaster, the FCC designates frequencies for emergency use on 40m and 75m for the duration of the disaster. The FCC also authorized use of five channels on the new 60m band by Amateurs for emergency use to commence on 07/03/2003. BPL would render the HF spectrum unusable for communication. In addition to the Amateur Radio Service, there are numerous other users of HF spectrum that would be adversely affected; the most important of which is the US Military. Other services include the Citizens Band service and shortwave broadcast. The bottom line is that the FCC must provide protection for licensed users of this spectrum (i.e. hams) from unlicensed Part 15 users (i.e. BPL)."
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WD8LQB on June 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I added a comment. I noticed that the count is up to 1183 comments at the FCC site. I know it takes a little time to do this, but this appears to be a serious subject. Everyone needs to take some time to read the information on what BPL is and then make a comment.
I was originally licensed in 1977, and left amateur radio in the early 1980's until my return in 2002. I appreciate what I missed during those years, and I don't want to lose it again.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 BPL- Just say NO!!
|
|
|
by N5LGV on June 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Below is the URL that will take you directly to the FCC
comment page. Speak out about BPL.
73
Keith
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/ecfs/Upload?hot_docket=1007100800%7C03-104%7CBroadband+Over+Power+Line+%28BPL%29&Send=Continue
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KB7UED on June 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Japan was smart ewnough to refuse this spectrum polltuing proposal. Since the power companies are so slow to react to obvious interference issues, this will open up a quagmire of unprecedented proportions. Between leaky cable systems, the plethora of part 15 devices already polluting the airwaves, it is a sign of where we are headed if we don't up our ranks.
Maybe some of the oldtimers have had their fun on the HF bands, and since thay won't be around much longer, don't care, I feel those who are in it for the long shot should raise as much hell as they can about it. The Internet is a construct acting as reality. Although I use it for business, over 80% of use is reported to be for porn! Frankly, I am glad when a sat or ISP crashes and shows how frail it is. Kinda like cell phones, one sat goes awry, and the whole system is compromised. In their lust for profits, the FCC makes some very obtuse, impractical things available to a generally uneducated public-many of whom vote!
With the citizens radio corps coming along, it'll only be a matter of time before the whole damn thing is gone-replaced by people who have never had the pleasure of using non infrastructure based communications.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K6AER on June 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Gentleman,
I understand this is an emotional issue but you are getting worked up over nothing. Everyone is missing the obvious. If you take the whole HF spectrum of 30 MHz and divide it by a thousand users you end up with a digital bandwidth of 3 kHz. This is much slower than a phone dial up. Bottom line is no one will put in an infrastructure with such limited bandwidth. Today's market is looking for 1.55 MBps minimum speed. This idea is still born from a practical marketing business plan.
This is why all the wireless carriers are scrambling for microwave spectrum. That is where the bandwidth is. Even then they need cell towers with limited coverage in order to maximize the available spectrum. The last thing you want in a wireless plant is a frequency that will broadcast for many miles. You create you own interference limiting how many customers you can bring on line. Also with all the AC leakage that power lines create their signal to noise ratio would be unusable.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N0MLR on June 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One thought comes to mind here.
What ever happened to the " You Must be capable of transmitting Morse Code at 5 WPM in order to transmit on frequencies below 30Mc"? Power lines are not sheilded and will radiate in all directions and the grid will carry it to many parts of the country. Could this be the end of the code requirement in a very sly way? After all we dont want all the internetters breaking the law?
One positive here maybe would be that all the HF Hams could stop spending money on all the latest antennas and just hook to the power line and start talking. Imagine having a QSO with someone in California on one watt? You know the power companies will use signal amps for reliability so it might just be possible. ANd Hey since it is going on the power line could all the no code people QSO that way and not be in violation since it is over the Power Line.
Its just some random thoughts but we seam to be opening a very large can of worms here. The FCC cant police the rules they have now. Whats going to happen when free banders hook up and start DXing over the power grid? With such a system it would be impossible to get a fix on the offender since it is coming from every where at once?
73's
Greg Dunn N0MLR
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by K9PO on June 26, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The ITI has responded to the BPL issue and even they (who would likely benefit from BPL) are asking the FCC to study the impacts more before making a ruling. I have attached their comments below.
73
Scott
Before the
FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS COMMISSION
Washington, D.C. 20554
_______________________________________________
)
In the Matter of )
)
Notice of Inquiry on Broadband Powerline Systems ) ET 03-104
)
_______________________________________________ )
Comments of the Information Technology Industry Council
The Information Technology Industry Council (ITI) represents the top U.S. providers of information technology products and services. ITI is the voice of the high tech community, advocating policies that advance industry leadership in technology and innovation, open access to new and emerging markets, support e-commerce expansion, protect consumer choice, and enhance the global competitiveness of its member companies.
INTRODUCTION
ITI applauds the Commission for its ambitious and forward looking efforts to critically examine the nation’s spectrum policy and resources. We believe that the Federal Communication Commission’s (Commission or FCC) efforts, including the Spectrum Policy Task Force, will help improve the management and assignment of spectrum in the United States and increase access to broadband services for all Americans.
ITI supports policies that will promote the rapid development of affordable, high-speed Internet access. The goal is to ensure that the maximum number of consumers can experience the full potential of the Internet and the information technology revolution. In particular, we support the Commission’s proceedings, such as this one, seeking to provide multiple platforms for broadband using existing electrical power lines to provide Internet and broadband services.
THE IMPORTANCE OF BROADBAND OVER POWERLINES
Broadband over power lines (BPL) has the potential to provide a ubiquitous third broadband pipe to homes. Moreover, this technology has the potential to become a last-mile solution throughout the United States, especially for those in rural and isolated areas due in part to the high infrastructure costs of reaching those areas. Connecting rural and isolated areas can provide extended educational and learning services, access to medical information and monitoring, emergency services, as well as e-commerce to those underserved areas. This technology would help connect those under served citizens into the digital world. Additionally, BPL could provide competition to cable, DSL, and satellite services because of the ubiquity of power lines to nearly every home in the United States. Finally, BPL serves an important homeland security function by providing a potential redundant data network for electronic communications.
BPL serves as an important last mile solution for rural areas and isolated areas because of the low density of these small transmitters near licensed services and unlicensed devices. Low density means that the radiated emissions from BPL are too distant or remote to cause significant harmful interference to those services and devices. Therefore, the Commission may not have to relax its radiated emissions limits to permit BPL to successfully operate in truly rural areas where interference with licensed services is non-existent or insignificant.
In cases where interference would be caused by radiated emissions from BPL, those areas are most likely already served by one or more other broadband pipes. Since the purpose of the Commission’s inquiry is aimed at providing access to broadband, BPL technology is a satisfactory approach to deliver digital communications services those living in truly rural and isolated areas. ITI recommends that the Commission maintain its stated intention to provide broadband using power lines only in cases where other services do not or will not exist in the near future. We believe limiting BPL to these truly rural and isolated areas may eliminate the interference issues that are very likely to occur if BPL is used in less rural areas where other transmitters and receivers are operating.
INTERFERENCE FROM POWERLINE TRANSMISSIONS
While BPL has significant potential to offer a third pipe into homes, there are also concerns that this technology will cause interference to both licensed services and unlicensed devices. ITI believes these concerns are technically well founded. Several other organizations have also expressed their reservations about the potential for interference from BPL. Accordingly, ITI suggests that special attention should be paid to potential interference to telecommunications, telephony, and cable TV wiring considering the likelihood that these wires will be in close proximity to the power lines on neighborhood distribution poles and in-home electrical wiring. However, if the broadband over power lines service is intended for customers without telephone or cable TV service, interference to telephone and cable TV lines may not be an issue.
BPL applications that utilize medium voltage overhead power lines may, however, cause interference to licensed and unlicensed services. The use of BPL with overhead power lines would create large antennas with potentially significant radiated emissions as the transmission travels down throughout the lines. This is because power transmission lines are normally unshielded and highly unbalanced at HF frequencies, thereby making them conductive to harmful interference from these elevated radiated emissions.
Potential interference from transmissions over power lines will be propagated by these extended wireline networks or antennas. In fact, the radiated emissions from these extended networks are likely to propagate throughout entire neighborhoods causing potential interference to many electronic devices and licensed services throughout that service area. These radiated emissions are a serious issue that should be addressed and resolved by technical experts to prevent any unwanted interference that could potentially harm nearby licensed and unlicensed services. ITI suggests that the providers of these services work closely with the Commission, industry, and other interested parties to ensure that these services comply with the existing Part 15 rules.
In addition, other equipment attached to the power lines may be directly affected by BPL signaling conducted down the actual cable. Accordingly, as more electronic devices are introduced to a BPL network, more occurrences of interference are likely to occur. The Commission should examine this situation, and in conjunction with technical input from industry and other interested parties, consider a host of mitigation options to protect potentially affected devices from interference. ITI will provide technical assistance, through its members, to help facilitate solutions to many of the interference issues with BPL. Moreover, ITI generally supports the involvement of all interested parties as a positive approach towards achieving voluntary and consensus solutions.
PART 15 LIMITS PREVENT INTERFERENCE FOR ITE
The current Part 15 limits for information technology equipment (ITE) and telecommunications systems have been very effective for preventing interference from individual electronic devices and establishing a regulatory environment that has fostered the rapid growth in information technology products in the United States. The Commission’s Part 15 Rules continue to provide a balanced approach to spectrum allocation, interference protection, and provide stability for manufacturers to design products that will integrate and operate efficiently with existing systems resulting in more long term value for the consumer.
ITI supports the introduction of technologies that will provide broadband services to all Americans, including distribution over power lines. However, this technology should be designed so that it is deployed in compliance with the Commission’s Part 15 Rules for interference. ITI suggests that any proposed rulemaking for BPL include detailed procedures and testing methodology to verify compliance to existing FCC rules.
Currently, the Part 15 Rules provide limits for unlicensed devices to prevent interference with other unlicensed devices as well as licensed services. These limits were designed with relatively small interference sources in mind. In those cases where interference does occur from an unlicensed device, it can be easily moved to prevent any interference. However, in the case of BPL, moving the fixed electrical network is impossible. Therefore, suitable mitigation solutions must be identified and verified as effective to mitigate this interference under the current rules before deployment of BPL systems.
The existing limits for “carrier current systems” were written when only low power, low frequency, and relatively narrow band systems were deployed. New systems being deployed today use significant portions of the available bandwidth and as such, are much more likely to cause interference to other services and devices. Continuing deployment of electronic devices in conjunction with significantly more robust carrier current systems will invariably lead to more instances of harmful and disruptive interference. Therefore, ITI requests the Commission review the emissions limits for these higher frequency carrier current systems similar to the current ITE requirements. We believe such limits will prevent the increasing likelihood of instances of interference from these systems.
ITI supports the Commission’s current Part 15 Rules for ITE, but opposes any modifications of the electromagnetic interference limits for the purpose of supporting BPL deployment. Accordingly, we believe the current rules, providing that BPL systems are classified as ITE, are sufficient to protect unlicensed and licensed services from interference and provide the consistency necessary for the introduction of new technologies and products. ITI suggests the Commission, during its review of BPL, examine carefully and determine whether the conducted emissions limits and test methods need further review. This determination will protect all users of the limited frequency spectrum from interference and continue to fulfil the Commission’s ambitious and forward looking efforts to improve the management of spectrum in the United States.
INTERNATIONAL EXPERIENCES WITH BPL
The European Union and its standards bodies, CEPT, ETSI, and CENELEC have studied approaches for transmitting data over power lines similar to the Commission’s proposal. However, at this time, the European Union has not gone forward with any significant deployment of these services. This is largely because of concerns over harmful interference to licensed services caused by radiated emissions from these networks.
Additionally, the specific characteristics of the European Union’s electricity distribution network also pose significant technical problems for this service. These technical obstacles have not been resolved in Europe, but should be examined closely by the Commission and service providers here in the United States to identify possible solutions to the unwanted interference that can be caused by BPL service distribution. We suggest a thorough examination of the European model which may provide assistance in overcoming similar technical obstacles in the United States.
In Japan, delivery of broadband over power lines has not proven to be successful without causing significant interference to licensed services. Therefore, Japan has not authorized this type of technology for broadband delivery. The Commission and BPL service providers should also examine the Japanese model in hopes of resolving similar interference issues in the United States with this technology.
CONCLUSION
Finally, the Commission has stated its preference for addressing actual occurrences of interference from unlicensed devices with specific remedies for those instances. ITI supports this approach since it permits unlicensed devices to be deployed as long as those devices do not interfere with other devices and services. We believe this spectrum approach works well in the United States and has resulted in the wide spread proliferation of advanced technology products while fully protecting the rights of licensed service providers.
ITI members are the leading manufacturers of information technology equipment. Therefore, ITI has a keen interest in fostering the rapid deployment of broadband services to the maximum number of American citizens. ITI supports the Commission’s proposal to utilize broadband over power lines to accomplish this goal. However, ITI members feel strongly that higher speed BPL technology systems should be deployed and operated within the existing ITE limits as defined by Part 15 ensuring that harmful interference to existing unlicensed devices and licensed services does not occur.
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KF6JZC on June 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I don't seem to see much about the security aspect of this technology. Unless there is encryption done on the signal, it would seem that this technology could be easily snooped by others. I think I saw one post on this but it would seem that the description of BPL has not addressed this issue very much. Also, if I decide I don't want to use BPL do I still have to pay for it in my utility bill (or what-ever)?
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by KC7YCL on June 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hmm, so what you're saying is Corporate America and welfare recipients are in league with each other? The sky is falling! You see the problem, but I think you're confused about the cause.
"This new internet technology will not stop there, we all will be taxed so everyone including welfare recipients will have access to the internet because some bureaucrats were paid off by corporate America." - K3IVB
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by WN2A on June 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Very well stated!
Yes the ARRL is the ONLY organization and QST the only mag I saw any activity on the matter.
The Amateur Radio equipment manufacturer's have said
zilch on this, As you said,the other orgs (with exceptions :SETI League,Recnet) haven't said much.
I see 3 of the 5 FCC commissioners as being completely enthralled with BPL and clueless as to the interference
issue. Nancy Victory of the NTIA praised the FCC for investigating BPL, but she did not fully stress the interference issue. The interference issue must be raised again and again until they hear it!
Did YOU file your comments? I did (#2003622364321)
and will again!
Mike, WN2A
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by RADIOWIENER on June 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
BPL has come in under the radar. Most of the US population today is ADHD, want more access to Ritalin, cannot read, and do not care. The citizen is uninformed. I myself am guilty. I do not even know where or how to file a comment on this. But if you tell me how to do so I will do it.
|
| |
|
RE: Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by N1OL on June 30, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Comments are due on or before July 7, 2003. The FCC now is accepting electronically filed comments via its Electronic Comment Filing System (ECFS).
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/upload_v2.cgi
In the "Proceeding" field, enter "03-104" and complete the required fields. Comments may be typed into a form or you may attach a file containing your comments.
Many good comments have been filed, one you may like to review is here;
http://makeashorterlink.com/?C5C931A05
|
| |
|
Docket 03-104 Where is Everybody?
|
|
|
by NL7GB on June 5, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thank you for everyone who has commented on this to the FCC. I did, but when I find time and have a better grasp of the subject I hope to make a better one and submit that.
Please do not be put off by feeling the need to make a "perfect" comment submission or that your submission is somehow not awesome enough. Just get a post in there that is truthful and respectful. If you feel that this is a waste of time, then please consider that the maximum time you need to "waste" is only a few minutes!
In addition to this, please consider ways to make this a political issue. I read one comment that had a number of politician's names attached to it. If you have suggestions about how to bring this forward as a political issue, please share your ideas here!
Thanks again for a great effort guys!
73
Dave
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Invite Your Congressman or Congresswoman to Field Day!
UPLC Comment Shows BPL Campaign Starting to Pay Off, Haynie Says:
Broadband Provider to Drop BPL in New York Trial Community:
BPL Updates from All Around the World:
Radio Hams at Risk from Broadband: (Positive International Press!)
Other General Articles
eHam.net - server performance issues
USS Indianapolis CA-35 Radio Room
Lecher Wire Follow-Up
eHam Hiccup
Icom HM 98 or HM 133 Hand Mic Project
|
