HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
Dan Cox (KD6NXI)
on
October 19, 2003
View comments about this article!
HAM Radio has no chance of overcoming BPL.
I just recently received a letter from the ARRL which tried to convince me to not only sign up for their membership but also to send them a donation to their 'Spectrum Defense Fund'. The letters I occasionally get from them are very similar to the same ones you would get from the NRA only you substitute amateur radio for guns etc.
I live in a rural area about 6.5 miles outside of the city. In town you can get DSL and Cable broadband service. Out here you are lucky if your dial up connects at 21,600 and, when it does connect it's prone to random disconnects, stalls and dropped packets and lets not forget the ridiculous latency times which have made playing any online game next to impossible. If you attempt to get the phone company to fix your problems sooner or later it will come out that you are using the line for dial up and your problem is related as such. At this point they will become quite hostile, and possibly attempt to force you to sign papers that will require you to pay a service charge just to look at the lines even if you know for certain it's on their side of the demarcation box.
Broadband in the United States has a 35 percent penetration rate. That means out of millions upon millions of computer users that only 35 percent have broadband and the remainder have some form of dial up. Assume for the moment that there are 150 million computer users in the United States. In reality it's probably much greater. For round numbers let's be super conservative in our estimate and assume there are 100 million who want or need (in the case of some businesses) broadband. Imagine the revenue that will be generated by the 100 million users. Even if you simply take the amount they will pay collectively in monthly fees of approximately 40 dollars a month, then the total income for the broadband providers would be 4 billion dollars! Now consider the massive advertising revenues that will be generated from targeting all manner of forms of Internet advertising at these users broadband and otherwise. We must also consider the massive amount of merchandise they will be purchasing on the net, the taxes they will be paying if the companies they do business with are in their own state and the online services, news, stocks etc and otherwise that they will be subscribing to.
Now consider the fact that there are 160,000 active HAMs in the US. This number comes from the ARRL's most recent anti BPL propaganda letter. The only revenue that HAMs generate is the meager amounts we contribute to the economy through primarily 'new radio' purchases. The fact is HAM's don't contribute or represent any great economic factor compared to 100 MILLION computer users and that's a conservative number. The sheer amount of revenues, incomes, as well as goods and services created, produced and consumed will make any consideration to HAM radio seem absolutely absurd.
To continue, if you negate the research benefits, the community aspect and the massive amount of information available on the Internet and choose only to see it as entertainment then what right do we, 160,000 have against the desires of tens upon tens if not hundreds of millions? Frankly our concerns are pretty petty in the overall scheme of things and I don't see how we could possibly justify our opposition to broadband simply because our 'entertainment' is more important than 'theirs'. Any community service aspect argument as most of us know is pretty thin.
A unified energy and information delivery system is the next logical step in our technological evolution and if HAM radio is supposed to be about advancing the state of the art in electronics and communications then we have profoundly missed the boat on this one.
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W3DCG on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
So does anyone have any info, or monitored the impact of the Corridor based system that promises 216 Mbps throughput, and their claim to be using 5 Ghz on the medium-voltage lines?
PG&E, anyone know where they might be conducting the tests so someone might go near with a rig and check it out?
Any theories as to the validity of the non-HF pollution that supposedly is a huge hurdle cleared, by using 5 Ghz on the power lines? Could it be true, that 5 Ghz wouldn't really be noticed by those listening in on the HF spectrum?
If it's true, and we have not a snowball's chance to stop BPL, then perhaps we need to conduct more research on this Corridor technology and back it if their claims are true.
It would be like intervening at the inception of the fossil fuel industry, and introducing the cleaner, less harmful, more efficient alternative, before the fossil fuel industry got it's foot off the ground.
Who says that Pro Know Coders are caught in some bass-ackwards time warp and not progressive. hi.
It's something promising to chew on,
73.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K4III on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Commercially speaking, you have made many true factidious points and done some hefty research. Don't forget Satellite hi-speed Internet accessible anywheres in the USA, and other services such as DSL which are still in their introductory and early stages.
If having a home phone is still considered a luxury, I don't see how Internet service, or simply having cell service can justify destruction and failure to other already established FCC-licensed services as well as our nations security. I know it is a great commercial medium and big $$ can be made. Although BPLs benefits may outweigh your losses where you are located, this may not be the case for others and BPL will destroy many activities and communications that even non-hams and shortwave listeners rely upon.
You wrote a good article, and your title is likely true, although we shouldn't forget we share close spectrum with some pretty "hefty neighbors" such as the military who will probably fight it as well.
We are a "non-commercial" public service and we would have lost many bands to commercial & military services today if the FCC didn't have any consideration for us. From what I understand, our country is (at least it has been) very supportive of non-commercial organizations and an "individuals freedoms & rights". And our service and bands are often shared or in close proximity to military & commercial ones. And now I would hope security is of a little more importance than Internet distribution planning.
It kinda goes back to the original founding of the Amateur hobby where the govt wanted to make all radio transmission military and commercial, however decided on educational and non-commercial services which provide specific local needs such as emergency communications and general goodwill that sometimes still exist to this day.
I wouldn't be suprised if the FCC gave the go-ahead for corporations to use BPL, but with their lack of knowledge, stricter guidelines, operating requirements, and short focus nowadays, I'm 95% certain that if it is permitted and set up to cover most of the USA, shortly after inteference on a major scale will impede federal services to the point of pulling BPL out of service, as done in various other countries, probably under some security reasoning.
If I was CEO or was on the deciding BOD for a power company, I might still carry out some Research & Development on the technology, but would rather spend the bulk of the funding to hire & keep employees and focus on possible ways to harness the technology differently to stem inteference such as through future power-line construction.
Perhaps with further research & development someone may create some device that would reduce the inteference using simple circuitry so that HF and shortwave can co-exist? That would be a good starting point for an electric company... Since they are unlicensed for the new service and according to "CURRENT LAWS" must protect licensed services... However, I guess the only way to try it is to drop the current laws entirely since it doesn't look like the service can coexist easily. Lets see whether this will be done...
I'm sure we'll find out soon enough. Maybe the power companies can sue the FCC for costs incurred if the FCC permits BPL then pulls it at a later date. Remember, the FCC was sued and lost for taking frequencies away from a company that acquired them and went bankrupt before they could pay for them...
I hope this is something the FCC has seriously considered!
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W5JBP on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dan may have done some research, but not much was actually factual. First of all, the letter did not say there are 160,000 active hams, it said join the 160,000 members in supporting the Spectrum Defense Fund. As of the 12th of this month, there are 682,182 licensed amateurs. How many are active? Our best guess is around 250,000 to 300,00 that get on the air with some degree of regularity. Now that we have that cleared up, lets look at why Dan does not have cable or DSL.
Dan said that he is 6.5 miles from town. The cost of installing cable is about $2,500 per mile (conservative number) so for the cable company to get Dan’s business they will have to invest $16,500 more or less. Assuming that they will charge Dan $30 per month it will take 48 years to get their investment back. Dan surely has a few neighbors that might sign up as well, so knock the time down to say, 6 years. Still not a good investment for the cable company. Consider the Telephone Company. They can do DSL out to about 20,000 feet before another “switch” has to be installed so they can get within three miles before another major investment is required. You can play investment numbers with this all day long, but the long and short is that it is just not economical for the Telco’s or Cable companies to make these type of investments for the rural customer.
But wait, Dan has electric lines not only going down the road in front of his house, but they come in as well. What an opportunity! The BPL industry has played on this heavily in promoting broad band to the FCC. But again let us look at the economics. The PLCA says that this is the “last mile solution.” Fiber pulled in to the medium voltage station (14.4 kV) injection of the signal and down the line it goes until it travels about 2,000 feet then a repeater is needed. In addition at every pole transformer, a bypass has to be installed. In looking at Dan’s situation the cost are just about the same as the Telco’s or the Cable companies.
I have seen a number of business models that show that the BPL out to Dan would not happen any sooner that any of the other services. One professor at Carnegie-Mellon took into account that over a period of five years the cost by other broadband services would drop by 33 percent, so now the payback is even longer.
Dan, don’t fall for the public relations hype that the BPL industry is putting out. In sales we call it “fluff.”
Jim Haynie, W5JBP
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD7EFQ on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
As long as we have a republican administration in power, it is going to be tough fight. They always side with big business and screw the little guy. However, I feel BPL will be a flash in the pan as Windows software versions are. About every 3 years new formats come out rendering the previous ones obsolete in a few years. ( I understand 98 & ME will no longer be supported next year) I imagine BPL will be replaced pretty quickly with fiber and or Satellite forms in a few years. Meanwhile, Amateur radio will flounder. I personally am not interested in VHF/ UHF except for HT/emergency service work, so if HF goes away, I'm DONE with amateur Radio. 73.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W0UCE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dan's comments regarding commercial interests and market potential are valid and we as a community should be concerned.
From a practical point, the only two allies for amateur radio's position are the league and a very small segment within the FCC responsible for Amateur Service. Combined our allies are underdogs and have high odds against combined forces on the commercial side.
We as hams must do everything possible to support our position regarless of operating mode preference and a good place to start is banding together at the club level with letters to the FCC, congressmen and others stating in a professional manner the value of Amateur Radio and the impact of BPL. We can band together on eHam.net as well sharing information and recommendations versus taking shots at each other - lets be professional and contribute to the fight.
On the light side... maybe we should simply turn Wayne Green loose on the BPL commercial guys.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by G4AON on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It's not amateur radio alone which will suffer from interference from BPL. Consider broadcasting, aviation, military, etc.
This week there was a European Union workshop on BPL, the majority of input was against it, see:
http://europa.eu.int/comm/enterprise/electr_equipment/emc/plcworkshop.htm
What have YOU done to make your voice heard on the subject?
73 Dave, G4AON
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N3HKN on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Will the BPL activity have a chilling effect on manufacture of new Ham equipment? Why make radios that only receive noise??
Dick N3HKN
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by FJGH on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
With all the talk about disaster to ham radio from BPL and the public service by ham radio that it is supposed to provide, I don't hear anybody talking about cleaning up the HF bands which any outsider would probably consider a total waste of spectrum as now used.
Hams might want to consider changing their behavior to justify keeping their bands. As of now, anyone wanting to justify taking spectrum away from hams only has to point to their abuse of what they have.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You guys need to calm down and read K1ZZ's editorial in the latest QST.
PAN
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K0BG on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I think the quoted numbers for market penetration are a bit high, but still valid compared to any amateur market penetration. There is another interesting side light to this which I have not seen mentioned in the numerous articles on BPL.
My local power company, Xcel, is experimenting with radio-controlled meters where in the "meterperson" drives down the street with a truck sending signals to the various meters which respond back with their readouts. Other than the power supply is connected to your side of the meter, there is little impact to amateurs. However, if you read their annual report, it appears Xcel will be using BPL for this activity as well as selling the broadband to consumers. They say the constant 24/7 reading of individual customers will allow them to adjust their powergrid distribution to better match power use.
The question remains, which hocum is which?
Alan, KØBG
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If it was just ham radio versus BPL, you point would be valid. But its not just ham who has issues with BPL. Add to the list of those who have issues with BPL the following: (Intl. Telecommunications Union, BBC, Australian Communications Authority, JARL, Natl. Academy of Sciences, N. American Shortwave Association, Natl. Public Radio, Harris Corp., Cingular Wireless, ATT, Natl. Association of Broadcasters, Verizon, and many other large institutions including other government agencies). No, this matter is only getting started and BPL implementation in its current format is questionable.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a question to pose to the author:
What makes you think you will be one of the lucky ones to get BPL service? And what makes you think it will be as cost effective as dialup?
You see, I have worked in the telecom industry and have seen the rollout of 3G wireless. It was a running joke in our company that we had nationwide 3G coverage "in selected urban areas".
BPL doesn't stand a chance in urban areas because DSL, cable, satellite and fiber are available at competitive pricing. (Right now, I'm sending this over a 512K fiber connection for $26.95 a month.) I suspect the power companies will end up in much the same boat as the 3G wireless companies...subsidized buildout of the system with tons of debt to supply a product that is undifferentiated in the marketplace.
And in rural areas, I suspect the economics of the matter will be prohibitive--the same reasons telcos don't install DSL in rural areas and the same reason rural areas don't have 3G coverage. Do the power companies know something about economics the telcos and 3G wireless companies don't? Doubtful.
Don't think of BPL as a "last mile" technology here...I suspect in rural areas it will be a "last 5 or 10 mile technology". Meaning more equipment, higher signal levels, and more capital expenditure.
Plus, those in rural areas are the least likely to need broadband. The largest user of broadband by far is businesses, who locate in urban areas.
It's funny, because 12 years ago, most people hadn't even heard of the internet. Now, broadband internet connections ranks right up there with life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.
How did we survive for millions of years without the internet?? Beats the heck outta me.
Steve, KE4MOB
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K1KP on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Dan-
If I summarize you’re article:
1. The ARRL is like the NRA because they appeal for money in the same manner.
2. There’s so much more money on the side of BPL that we might as well give up.
3. Sheer numbers dictate the rights of citizens. I.e. if you’re outnumbered, you have no rights.
4. Because ‘ HAM radio is supposed to be about advancing the state of the art in electronics’, we should be embracing BPL instead of fighting it.
My responses by point:
1. You can include the National Model Rocketry organizations, along with probably every other charitable organization in your claim. Trying to paint the ARRL in the same light as the NRA based on the grammar and syntax of their appeal letters is inappropriate.
2. Possibly true, but it’s never been America’s style to abandon the underdog.
3. If numbers dictate rights, why do we have a handicapped stall in every restroom? Equal opportunity makes no allowance for numbers. What we do has to be based on what is right and just, not just what’s expedient. It might be expedient to allow the conviction of criminals based on evidence obtained without a search warrant, but eventually that degrades the rights and freedoms of all citizens.
4. Let me remind you that HAM radio is NOT ‘supposed to be about advancing the state of the art in electronics’. The five purposes for the Amateurs Radio Service are: emergency communications, advancement of the RADIO art, advancement of communications and technical skills, expanded pool of trained radio operators, and international goodwill. All of these purposes are still valid today as they were when originally drafted.
Finally, just what are you saying, anyway?
Is it…
There is no technical threat to radio services in the 2-80MHz range so BPL is OK and we should get on the bandwagon.
…or…
BPL is good for the country, so we should quietly give up our hobby.
Please be careful when proposing that the end justifies the means. This leads us down the slippery slope to dangerous territory.
-Tony, K1KP
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WR8D on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Guys and gals...i hate to say this but someone has to...if the arrl can make a buck off this bpl issue which they always find a way...Well you can fill in the blank space. Just hang on folks...its not about spectrum and hams...its about the almighty dollar.
John Blackburn WR8D
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K3UD on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It is not just ham radio that looses. Every user of spectrum from the top of the broadcast band to the bottom of the FM broadcast band also looses. Also, broadband, even where it is available, does not seem to be making a tremendous impact among most people who use the internet. Depending on where you get your statistics, broadband is penetrated somewhere between the 23% and 28% level nationwide. The 35% figure cited by the author is probably an optimistic estimate made by some industry sources, although I have no doubt that there are some locales that reach this.
In my area (Hopkinsville KY) we have 4 choices for broadband,
1. Charter Cable
2. DSL
3. Wireless (from the local power company)
4. Direct PC and its clones
Guess what? According to several media surveys done in this area only 18% of the households have broadband connections and the majority of this was because Charter Cable had a special where they gave away the Charter Pipeline high speed internet service (at 400k) if you signed up for a deeply discounted digital TV package for 14 months at $67 per month. (I took advantage of it)
Some of these packages are now running out and people are dropping the digital TV package along with the high speed internet and going back to expanded basic cable and dialup which can be had here for as low as $8.00 per month. To combat this, Charter recently decided to give everyone with Charter Pipeline the maximum bandwidth they offered which is
2.5MPS, at no extra charge. While I enjoy having broadband connections, I really do not need it for what I do on the internet and If the renewal price goes up much above what I am paying for both packages, I will also go back to basic cable and dialup.
I wonder what the potential return on investment would be for BPL? It seems that most households who computers connected to the internet use it mostly for e-mail and a relatively few favorite websites. Many are finding that $30 - $60 per month
(typical for this area, depending on what kind of broadband you have) is a bit much when $8.00 will do the job.
I have not seen any data on what BPL home delivery will cost but I would be willing to wager that it will not be any less than cable or DSL. I also would be willing to bet that if it were installed nationally and priced as cable et al is priced the penetration in rural areas would either be the same or less than in more populated areas. I do not know much about the broadband industry's return on investment, but I do know that no one is making much or maybe anything on broadband services here.
Like anything else in the marketplace, there is a demand side that has to be large enough to make the service profitable to its investors.
73
George
K3UD
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N8UZE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Do you really think the BPL companies will really bother to bring it out to the rural areas? There isn't enough money to be made by doing so. Remember they have to bypass all the transformers between where they inject the signal and the recipient. Since the injection point will be somewhere in a town or city, that's a lot of transformers to bypass to get it out to the rural areas. It will be more costly than bringing DSL to those areas and you don't see DSL moving with any speed to wire the rural areas.
This touting of bring high speed internet to the rural areas via BPL is a smokescreen to try to get a bad technology approved. They will never do it.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N8UZE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To W8RD
If you think the ARRL is making money, prove it. The IRS takes a dim view of non-profit organizations making a profit and mis-using the funds.
The ARRL is the only organized voice available to lobby for hams. If you don't like what they are doing, get involved, run for office, and change things from the inside. Sitting on the outside and complaining accomplishes ZERO.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N9AVY on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Seems to me that BPL has something in common with cold fusion and alchemy.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WB5HZE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Let's step back a bit so that the forest can be seen in spite of all of the trees . . .
1) BPL is permissible now under Part 15, and has been for years. The FCC only wished to know how they can modify existing regulations to facilitate deployment- they never asked whether BPL was good or bad.
2) The FCC is in a deregulatory mode relative to technologies of this sort and have no intention of placing additional controls that might impair the deployment of new technologies (whether good or bad). They feel that the marketplace, not regulation, should determine whether a technology succeeds or flounders.
3) Comments by the ARRL and others have clearly shown that BPL, as implemented in most pilot cases, cannot comply with existing Part 15 regulations unless someone turns a blind eye to the way that field measurement is executed. Therefore, the FCC could conceivably modify Part 15 in a manner beneficial to the BPL industry. That would probably suit the FCC fine, since as things stand now they will be completely unable to enforce/ resolve interference cases once the BPL services become widely deployed (the scope will simply too huge for their resources). This is the REAL issue in the ongoing proceedings- what will the FCC do with Part 15, and will we see a bad situation made even worse by deregulation?
4) BPL is bad for amateur radio and most other HF services- no doubt about it. We've a lot to lose- amateur radio can probably survive BPL, but it cannot remain the same unless we successfully protect ourselves.
5) On the other hand, emissions from amateur radio and other HF services will probably be POISON for BPL, unless that industry can develop adequate safeguards for their own systems. They have a heck of a challenge in front of them!
6) Once BPL is deployed it won't be stuffed back into the box except by business failure of that industry. There is a distinct possibility that this can happen- but it will probably take a while at best, or may not occur at all.
So my own opinion is that BPL is coming whether we like it or not. It is a steamroller that is currently permissible under Part 15 and which has enormous support and resources. The pertinent question is . . . can we protect amateur radio from the effects of BPL?
Education of the BPL industry is one possibility- convincing them that it is in their own interest to avoid our particular slices of spectrum, to defend their systems against interference from us. Problem is, other HF incumbents can similarly interfere with them, and if they avoid everyone then they have no usable spectrum. A nice kettle of fish there . . . and we have possibly alienated the BPL folks to the extent that their minds will remain completely closed (no one likes to be told that their child is ugly, stupid, and ill-mannered- even if it is true).
Increased effort to push the amateur radio Spectrum Protection Act through COngress is another option- IF the language is modified so as to protect our existing spectrum (and any future amateur radio spectrum) as if it were a pollution-free national park (no spectrum sharing except under existing/ future ITU agreements, no Part 15 interference). To my own way of thinking, this might be a very good path that may be more productive than continued trench fighting in the current proceedings.
I don't mean to suggest that we give up the BPL fight completely, but if the FCC and the BPL industry don't understand the technical issues by now then they are, frankly, unlikely to do so tomorrow. The ARRL folks have done a great job presenting the facts and I don't know what more can be said. We need to keep our standing in this proceeding, but it might be a good idea to shift resources and focus on the other opportunity in front of us.
I see that the ARRL has recently reminded us to get behind the Spectrum Protection Act. This appears to be a good opportunity to protect our hobby once and for all. We've currently got good visibility in front of Congress due to our natural relationship with Homeland Security, and we need to take advantage while this visibility remains. If as many hams were to support this effort as have risen in opposition to BPL, then we are bound to gain additional Congressional support for the Act. I'll simply suggest that we make a strong effort to not only protect the quantity of spectrum available to amateur radio, but the QUALITY of that spectrum as well.
The Bottom Line- the FCC will do as they are instructed by Congress, every time. If Congress tells them to make it easier for technologies such as BPL to be deployed, they will do so (Telecommunications Act of 1996). If Congress tells them to protect Amateur Radio's spectrum as a valuable national resource, then they will comply with that directive, and we will be saved from BPL & future problems of a similar nature (amateur radio spectrum becomes a "no-fly" zone for encroaching technologies & services).
Just one man's opinion. Is it time to regroup and focus on a different opportunity to accomplish the same goals?
Regards . . . Ron WB5HZE
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W5HTW on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To me it still appears BPL is far from being implemented, and likely will never be implemented in its current (pun) form. Many valid reasons for that are posted here already, but one additional one is that I doubt powerlines are ready for digital communications. Even drive in the city with your car radio on? The noise you hear is from power lines. Try it in a rural area. Power line noise is radiated two hundred feet from the 14.4 lines. We know what noisy phone lines do to our internet connection. Why would we assume noisy power lines would do less?
The point is most power companies would have to do some truly serious line upgrades to make the lines servicable for data transfer. And most rural companies will not EVER be able to do that. Where I live I have frequent power outages on a short distant 14400 line that supplies only about 10 homes, no farms, no irrigation, no welding, no industrial type of activity. Yet they have been "repairing" this line for 10 years, and making very little headway. Why? Faulty breakers, dusty insulators, wind in the lines, hawks or buzzards on the insulators, etc. It is unreliable for power; it would be much less reliable for data transmission. And it would cost them probably $100,000 to upgrade just this small area. Once upgraded, it would still be subject to line noise and interruptions.
Comparing it to DSL, the cost would be astronomical. I, too, live in a rural area, about 9 miles from the exchange.) DSL will NEVER come here. Qwest is quering the feasibility of DSL in this area but there minimum requirement for a point more than 3 mile from the exchange is 100 interested customers. I have about ten neighbors within an eight square mile area, and as far as I can guess, not more than three of them (besides myself) have computers. We would have to turn into a city before DSL would be viable here. For the same reason BPL will not be here, in any format, for years and years to come.
I believe that when the power companies start to look at the limited market they have for BPL versus the huge cost, their bubble is going to be really really thin. This is not to suggest they aren't going to play with it and experiment, and that could be good, for it may lead to improvements that allow us to coexist. In its present form, BPL is not likely to be any benefit to the power companies at all, but a long term financial liability.
Someday BPL, or its offspring, may actually go into the countryside, but not likely in areas like mine or like Dan's. IF it ever does, few of us living today will see it arrive at our homes.
My guess is ham radio will have moved to the internet by then anyway.
ed
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K0CBA on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Please don't "keyboard spank" me for my question but why wouldn't it be more practical to put WiFi on all the cell towers? If a 500 or 600 mw. "shoe phone" gets coverage in all but the most godforsaken areas, so could WiFi. There would still be many areas up the creek but many, many more people would have broadband than there is now.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AF1Q on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Its been coming for a long time. The dismantleing of the Amateur Radio service is just a political process that has been going on now for several years.
When Amateur Radio was told that code requirements could be reduced and even eliminated brought on a standing ovation. The incentive program was being taken apart, licences suddenly became an almost give away with the Extra Class being reduced to nothing more than a memorization challenge. Its easy to see that before long Amateur Radio will disapear into the past. If there ever was a reciepe for destroying Amateur Radio its what is happening now. The almighty cash cow will once again consume in the face of progress.
I do consider my self fortunate that I was able to experience the past 47 years of Amateur Radio and that alone makes me a winner. AF1Q
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W0UCE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
You hit the nail on the head... Community WIFI is an excellent option that has yet to reach widescale depoloyment.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W0TLO on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It would seem that this discussion has become rather moot.
I read an article just two days ago that stated that an electric company was authorized to commence SELLING
BPL service some where up east.
They stated that the service should be available to
the public in (if I remember correctly) six weeks
after signing an agreement with the city council.
We have now entered the next phase.
73
John
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The ARRL reminds me of that new commercial out now with the corporate CEO in a glass case, in a museum, now extinct. You see a flashback where his shrink is telling him: "Adapt, change or perish", the CEO replies: "I'd rather perish".
The ARRL has been an organization of extra class operators for extra class operators, not concerned about tech license class operators and not concerned at all about the future of amateur radio as they have strived and succeeded in keeping it in the past and having filters to chase thousands of people a year away from amateur radio. But now that they need financial help and public support, all of a sudden ALL license classes have become important and meaningful.
Now really folks, do you believe that the law makers in Washington listen to, care or pay attention to those grumpy old men who come and complain about noise all the time or do they pay more attention to a lobby group for a deep pocketed utility company gives them a nice fat campaign contribution and promises to create thousands of new jobs in their districts with new technology and construction contracts. Plus give them what they want, like high speed Internet at a lower cost.
Oh well...since it seems like the ARRL is the best and only weapon that amateur radio and the HF code crusaders have, hopefully I'll get a good price for my shortwave receivers on eBay to someone who lives in a rural area.
73
Dave
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K3UD on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
John,
I think that might have been Manassas VA.
Also,
The WIFI idea might be the best of all possible worlds. A few months back, Wired Magazine had a lengthy feature about the possibilities of bringing WIFI to rural areas for broadband connections. As I remember it, they were talking about repeaters on power poles. I do not claim to understand the technology or the costs of WIFI but if it works at Starbucks or McDonalds (yes, that McDonalds) why not at a power pole in front of your house linked to others?
73
George
K3UD
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W0UCE on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The tone and content of your post certainly confirms lack of experience, knowledge and tact by the author.
If it were not for us Old Timers, regardless of class of license, it is unlikely you would have the opportunity become a ham. Remember your words when you have been around a while and why not learn to elmer and contribute versus bad mouthing those who have kept the hobby alive.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG5JJ on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It's the Republican administrations' fault? Big money has been buying favor from Republicans and Democrats for years...
Perhaps a Democratic administration would squash BPL? Nuh-uh...they like money just like the Republicans.
73 KG5JJ (Mike)
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KZ9G on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
BPL is a disaster to licensed radio services. From what I hear, this technology has been dismissed in other countries as a viable transport method of broadband data. It's obvious that other segments of the RF spectrum, like the microwaves, are far more suitable to the delivery of "last mile" broadband data. Even though the business case for deploying a wireless solution isn't quite there yet, the outlook for widespread deployment within the next few years is bright. Despite the temporary business case roadblocks, a few systems are being installed today anyway. If eHam visitors are interested is researching such technologies, please visit the following URL's:
http://motorola.canopywireless.com/
http://www.mmc.net/canopy/CanopyProductOverview0702.pdf
I'm sure there are other point-to-multipoint systems out there that we can use as examples. 73.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N6JSX on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey, Dan hit the nail on the head - something I've been saying for years. when commerical interestes can make a buck and tax dollars be made - we WILL loose. Remember, the 220 UPS take away - no logic to it but money to be made. Then UPS said they couldn't do the technology and gave back the band - what did the FCC do - sell it off rather than returning it to HAM use.
To appease us they gave us 219-220 with a bunch of restrictions - like that 60m joke we just got.
About the same time Novice Enhancement came to be keeping the ARRL quite - as they saw more member$hips than retaining the 220 band.
So DON'T let the ARRL be our only VOICE they tried that with 220 and WE lost - check the records - the ARRL wanted to be the unifing voice for 220 (until they got a sweeter deal called Novice Enhancement and got bought off by the FCC).
All the ARRL HQ cares about is preserving their $alaries. So what is good for preserving $alaries is good for HAMdom.
Also interesting point that only ~20% of HAMdom are ARRL mumbers - wonder why? Who says we are all blind in one ear and deaf in the other eye?
Now what is needed is a Congressional LAW setting our band spectrum in mode and frequency - hard to buy off all 535 congresspersons but easy to slip white envelopes to only a few commissioners!
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I've read several articles already about WiFi providers and their lobby groups pushing for more frequencies. A little bit here, a little bit there. If more people were on the HF bands, things like Echolink and other Internet radio linked radios would not be putting an even higher demand on expanded broadband resources. As I mentioned above, if I have to sell my shortwave receivers I'll be listening to the streaming broadcasts online creating even more of a demand. Remember, there is no widespread public demand to have amateur radio, nobody at my office even knew what ham radio was until I started work there. People are already complaining and demanding to their politicians that affordable high speed Internet access everywhere for everyone is a right that they shouldn't be denied.
73
Dave
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As Dale stated above, one voice with only one set of ideas is a plan destined to fail. ARRL only cares about itself and it's hard core members, not the entire amateur community as a whole. Especially the tech license class. They are proudly and solely responsible for thinking of ways to chase hundreds of thousands of would be amateurs away instead of focusing on ways to bring more people into the hobby as it might make their members mad so the future of ham radio be damned. They'll all be silent keys in the next 15 to 20 years so they really have no incentive to do what's right and what's needed to keep this hobby interesting and to keep it alive with a large and strong population of amateur radio operators of all ages and license classes.
BTW - Has anybody besides me noticed on these various message boards reading posts from other amateur operators from different countries, don't you see a wider age range and more open minds with better ideas?
I can't wait for my ARRL membership renewal to come. It will go into the trash as did mine and my wife's membership cards three months ago. When I joined I didn't know what a narrow minded and anti-progressive organization they were. Any organization that purposely finds ways to filter people out of this hobby gets no support from me.
73
Dave
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WB2IFS on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
About wifi on cell towers...Flarion (http://www.flarion.com) is working on something similar. Look at is as Wireless-WAN.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W4VR on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I think Ham Radio has a small chance against BPL, but given the current FCC mood, it's lack of good engineers (they lost the good ones years ago), and the political and legal clout behind the electric utilities, it's going to be a difficult battle for HF users to win. About the only hope we have right now is the impending results of an NTIA study regarding the impact of BPL to Government HF operations. The FCC will listen to NTIA if Government safety and safety of life HF circuits are compromised, but will manage to circumvent any potential problems the ham radio community may have with BPL. When I worked for the Coast Guard on FCC/NTIA-related spectrum matters, we tried in vain to convince the FCC to place radiation limits on Power Line Carrier (PLC) Systems to protect safety of life Loran-C systems operating at 100 kHz; the FCC sided with the electric utilities to continue to treat PLC's as unintentional radiators, even though it agreed with the Coast Guard and FAA that it was possible for PLC's to interfere with Loran-C. As it turned out, aviators began using GPS-bases systems for navigation and PLC interference to Loran-C is no longer the threat it once was.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC5NYJ on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Community WiFI is, IMO, the best way to go with this. In rural areas, a network of cheap 54mb bridges would get the signal spread from the demarc in Hooterville all the way out to Farmer John, and beat the heck out of dialup, even at 256k per user. This technology is tried and true, and in use by many commercial entities for LAN links.
I'm not quite sure why the big push for this super high bandwidth for the average user. Most folks would be ecstatic over a DSL speed connection vs. dialup.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AA4PB on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Also interesting point that only ~20% of HAMdom are ARRL mumbers - wonder why?
Most of the other 80% are inactive. Don't worry about contributing your fair share to the battle. The rest of us will pick of the tab for you. Just sit back and relax and let the ARRL members take care of it for you.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N9NRW on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
HEY! WR8D
Why don't you shutup and stop bashing the ARRL.
Is that all you ever have to say?
Tell me what other groups have done to promote Ham Radio at the same level as the ARRL.
Sorry to all for posting off subject but his guy bugs the @#$% out of me.
Bob Herendeen
N9NRW
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by G3SEA on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Gentlemen !
United we stand, Divided we fall ! :)
Man your keyboards, sharpen your pencils,join the ARRL
and " Damn the BPL & naysayer's and full speed ahead " ! :)
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC9ANI on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I love the way a good thread turns into a "bash" the ARRL. At least no one has mentioned code/no code. The same guy that whined and moaned for weeks over whether a dealer sold him a repack on a cheap handheld radio and raked them over the coals for not adhering to a "strict" set of seller morals, Now wants to do the same to ARRL for having strict standards for the hobby. Hey if you want to stay a Tech licensee, that is fine and is your right to do so. But when you preach on and on about progress of the hobby and technological advances why would you personally not want to do the same. I belong to the ARRL and have only been a ham for two years. Have they done anything specifically for me - NO. Have they done anything specifically against me - NO. Is there another organization that represents our hobby in a more efficent manner. If so let us know. Maybe you will start one. You could include all your believes and standards and we could see how sucessful your "Tech's Radio and No Repacks League" would be. I won't pretend to understand all about the BPL issue, but will support any organization that attempts to help my new chose hobby. I'm in the HF world and hope to be able to continue! Bashing the ARRL is not the way to go. It's amazing that a 5 wpm code requirement could create a rift wider than the Grand Canyon.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AC0X on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
With all the potential for destructive inteference to ALL users of the HF spectrum it will cause, with the BIG question marks that BPL technology will even WORK over any appreciable stretch of distance, and the questions of how robust it would be in even a minimum amount of inteference (I'm not even talking about hams, even Grandma's Elecrolux might generate enough noise to cause it problems), anyone who posts anything supporting BPL is either a complete moron, someone who stands to gain a lot of money from the power companies, or someone whose purpose is to destroy ham radio. Any one of those three types of people don't deserve debate or discussion. They deserve only three words:
Go f**** yourself.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K1JAN on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I disagree with KD6NXI about us losing just because "big business" has more horsepower. In California, I have helped kill a couple of proposals by local governments already, and the state itself is now getting involved at the national level. You see, ALL of the California Highway Patrol, and MOST of the FIRE and Rescue services frequencies here are in ranges that would be as much or more affected that us! I have found that there are 21 states (so far) that use LOW-BAND VHF for primary communications throughout their states for the same types of services. Those guys would be essentially off the air! Having communicated with several CHP personnel, I have been told it would cost several BILLION (that's a bbbbb-B, folks!) to move California CHP alone, to UHF frequencies. That doesn't even consider the other 600,000+ public service users! These states are starting to be heard. The CHP is deadly serious about not spending any more money they don't have (I know everyone has learned that from the news, during this past election/recall!) and will fight to prevent it here. If California alone were to prevent it within it's borders, it would die on the vine, because there is no way to "contain" the emmissions from other areas. With California having (among the nuts and actors - redundancy there, sorry) the largest budget/population of anyplace within the US now, it is a BIG voice. We will obviously have to wait and see, but that voice alone could kill it. (tho, the CHP didn't even appear to KNOW about it until WB6FLY and then myself brought it to their attention)
Let's hope! Big voices outshout big dollars in polictics, and that's what this is down to!
K1JAN
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N6AJR on October 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I remember as a kid (way back when) the Government actually considered using atomic bombs to clear the freeway access from los angles to arizona, to get rid of the mountains. This was in the early days of "the bomb" and a lot of folks who didn't know ALL the facts thought it would work.
BPL will do the same thing for radio. Not just the 160 thousand or 650 thousand or who ever you need to count. This will affect all modes of radiated waves so TV over the air, Hiway Patrols communications, local police, FRS CB, Business band radios, aircraft, aircraft control towers and so on.
Folks it is not just about us.. think about it.. then write a letter AND send email to your congress folks, fcc and the president. ( the president has his own zip code...) and do it today, now tonight. It will help, if you don't belive the ARRL will help then do it your self...but do something. Writing here on eham is preaching to the pastor. WE agree, now write some one who gets elected.
tom N6AJR
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD7KGX on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
'TWAS said:
Dan said that he is 6.5 miles from town. The cost of installing cable is about $2,500 per mile (conservative number) so for the cable company to get Dan’s business they will have to invest $16,500 more or less.
I INTERJECT:
When I contacted the local cable company to see about the feasability of running cable down my street and hooking up cable to my business, which was located 600 feet off of a main road with cable, they told me that they would charge me $30 a foot to run cable down to my building... or $18,000 for those 600 feet! I had to pay up front (!) before they would do this!
What it costs, and what they charge, are two different things!
Needless to say I went to Radio Shack and bought a VHF/UHF yagi, put it up 40', and was perfectly happy.
Hooray for RF!
BTW, the reason that telco and electrical access exists out in the boonies is because these companies are required to run lines out there even though it is a loser financially... that's the price to be paid for being a regulated monopoly. But don't worry... it's made up for by charges elsewhere.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N6AJR on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
direct satalite dsl.. about $40 a month "If you can see the southern sky"
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AB0TJ on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I have a question... Is my power meter going to have an ethernet port on it now??
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by ZL2WJA on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi all from New Zealand,I have been following this BPL situation since late last year now and i feel that if the hams and other HF users band together to fight against this bad technology we have a good chance to beat this bad idea for internet delivery.
Here in New Zealand they did a test back in june up in Auckland ,but they had semi-success and are tring to iron out the problems which is to do with data not going through the transformers,hopefully with nzs low population (4 million) this technology would be uneconomicale to setup here.
I myself enjoy alot my HF radio and intend to continue to use it for years to come, and i can only hope that everyone else continues to run their hf stations.
So all i can say is keep up the fight, sure some might see it as alreday lost ,but lets prove them wrong .
With people such as ED W1RFI helping out at the ARRL with a good team of people theres a chance.
I have seen the work down by the ARRL and others on the net about the BPL situation,and feel confident that there is a strong case here against BPL.
Cheers and 73s from Jason ,new callsign ZL2FT.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by BIRDDOG on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm a new Ham. So not too knowledgeable about the fight that has been put up. I do wonder....
Why isn't there a large organized effort contacting Congressmen, Senators, and the President? It should be through snail mail. They don't pay attention to email. They pay attention to paper mail. They are also elected officials. They must listen to their voters. Congress can easily leave the FCC shaking in their boots...they have tons of power.
Just to let people know about my experience with rural broadband. I get excellent DSL. It is expensive. I don't need a phone other than for my broadband. So, in total, it costs me $89 a month. I know it's expensive to operate. We're a small rural town. But I do get excellent service. It's much better than the service I got in another small rural town through cable. Paid less too. I guess you get what you pay for.
RonP
KC0QXU
FP-682
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W3DCG on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Keeping in mind the quest for the all mighty dollars...
You know, if I was in the sales departments of a company that stood to gain from merely THE IDEA of BPL or BPL/Corridor, even when R&D came back and said it's an unlikely implementation, I'd sure be pushing it for a while afterwards.
I mean, 216 MEGA bytes per second is a huge. What typical internet user really needs THAT kind of throughput? Most are completely satisfied with DSL. DSL is relatively recent, with much invested, so there is another opponent to BPL.
At any rate-
Promise the moon (DSL) and it happens, promise Mars, the next frontier, make it sound like something the world needs and must have, make your stock soar all the way to Uranus. Even if humans never get there, several executives stand to make enough pennies to probably make it to Venus.
Take the corporate jet over to CT, pay a visit to Jim and the bunch, take them to dinner, let them in on the game so everyone can win, even if publicly someone gets to loose.
"Fluff" it up big time, move those dollars, get rich.
May sound like a half-baked idea, but if the world didn't actually turn around in this manner, I'd be very surprised.
To be clear and not sound unhealthily cynical:
Whether BPL is TRULY a REAL threat or not, I think the League should still be supported. They are our only unified voice, organized, methodical, and our credible force that has pull where it counts. They much more than protect us. They create scientific product reviews, and important publications. The League organizes and gives us structure. That alone is worth supporting.
I've seen several technicians and engineers in the radio business who were not hams, but they have at least an ARRL Radio Amateur's Handbook, and an ARRL Antenna Book.
Sure the real professionals out there might find slight errors in what is printed there, however my point here, is that the ARRL gives the Amateur world the credibility we must have in an often hostle legislative environment.
Without the ARRL, we're just a bunch of hobbiests, and when it comes time for legal defense: lobbiest wanna-be's.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG4YJR on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KC9ANI,
Thanks for becoming such a big fan of mine. I think you fit quite well with the ARRL "high" standards and no tolerance for different opinions besides your's or their's. I don’t know what you meant about moving on to higher technical standards though as the ARRL has been hell bent on protecting the old technology the most and proudly finding ways to discourage newcomers from entering this hobby. What percent of the questions on the current examinations are about packet radio, Internet linked repeaters and SSTV? Unlike you and the ARRL for which I will no longer support, I do believe that individuals have a right to express their opinion and to disagree with me and I like to hear both sides of a debate. I also think all license classes and individuals are important to amateur radio. I have never stated that amateur radio should become my way, nobody else's way and it should stay my way forever.
73
Dave
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by N3NL on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If the hams, shortwave listeners, MARS operators,
radio astronomers, and other users of HF don't have
a chance against BPL, then there is a real question
about the legitimacy of radio regulation and about
U.S. support for international treaties. As a
political scientist, I would like to point out that
a decline in legitimacy is highly undesirable.
73, Nickolaus E. Leggett, N3NL
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is serious stuff, folks. If we don't write our representatives and make ourselves heard and let big bu$ine$$ win, we can kiss our hobby/service goodbye. You don't have to support the ARRL to make yourselves heard.
There is more to ham radio than code/no-code debates. To you folks who just can't seem to let this go, please consider the time you are wasting by discussing this non-issue (and compared to the BPL threat, the fate of the code test *IS* a non-issue) and write some letters NOW- and I don't mean e-mails. Follow up the letters with a phone call. It doesn't take long to find out who your representatives are and to fire off a letter and phone call to them.
Please, folks... let go of the code test debate for an hour or two, and write your reps now. If people put half as much thought and time into writing their reps to let them know what BPL will do to our spectrum, we may just get somewhere.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Just the sort of article to raise the morale of the troops.
I disagree strongly with the article's author...we DO stand a fighting chance IF we get off our wide duffs and DO something. I have donated money to the ARRL, stirred up hate and discontent with my friends, and written every elected official I could think of. One even wrote back and was shocked to learn of BPL.
How many of your pet congressmen are aware of this issue? Probably not too many. Take it upon yourself to educate them. Use the letter that appeared on this site a while back as a template, BUT modify it somewhat to suit the need AND add your own thoughts and observations so it doesn't seem like just another form letter.
Kinda like those in Europe who didn't raise a finger when the Nazi's came to power. Remember the old saying....paraphrased somewhat of course....
"The only thing required for evil men to succeed is for good men to do nothing."
Similarly, if you do nothing about BPL or spectrum protection then expect to lose it all.
Just my 2.3684 cents worth.
Philip Neidlinger
KA4KOE
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KX2S on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
BPL all the way.
We don't need no damm Ham Radio.
Hams are just a bunch of old farts anyway.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W3JJH on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Wow! I spent the weekend operating Jamboree on the Air for our local Boy Scout District. I'm glad I did that rather than read some of the comments on this thread.
I don't think that we are wise to bash either of the major political parties. We will need votes from both sides of the aisle. A Democratic introduced the Amateur Spectrum Protection bill in the House this year. My Republican Congressman is one of the cosponsors. One of the hams in the House is a Democrat. The other is a Republican.
Both parties are influenced by political contributions. The Republicans raise two or three times as much money as the Democrats, but they do it retail, mostly from small contributors. The Democrats raise over ten times as much money as the Republicans from contributors who give over $100k! Who is beholden to big money? If you want influence, you have to either buy it or earn it. You can buy it by being a contributor, or you can earn with sweat equity. Unless your able to make maximum size contributions to a candidate, you'll get the most bang for your buck by pooling your contribution in a fund such as the ARRL's. The League's fund isn't finacing candidates; it's funding the ARRL's sweat equity lobbying effort on our behalf.
The NRA's Institute for Legislative Action is the most effective lobbying outfit in Washington. I wish the ARRL had one-tenth the clout that the NRA has. If that were the case, BPL would have been quashed already.
One of the comments above points out that the FCC is bound to follow Congressional mandates. Lobby your Congressman and Senators to get the Amateur Spectrum Protection bill passed into law. That's the most effective way to protect ourselves from BPL and similar threats.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WR8D on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
RE N9NRW: I guess when someone presents the truth it really gets to you huh Bob. Ever wonder why so many of the older guys have dropped out of the arrl. Walk up to one and ask him at the next club meeting...that is if there's anyone in your club thats been a ham for at least 15 years. Go check it out for yourself. Sorry i tick you off with my opinion..your attitude is another example of whats wrong with the amateur bands today. To many hot heads and ego's. Where i live we just spank their ass and they get over it real fast.
73
John WR8D
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Let's face it, politicians of all flavors are money-hungry... but as 'JJH points out, both major political parties have supported the spectrum protections for ham radio. I don't consider the BPL thing to be a political issue, I consider it to be a business issue, with monied interests salivating at the prospect of new revenues from BPL. After reading many of the comments here about just how lucrative BPL may or may not be, I'm not the least bit convinced that BPL is an inevitability. Regardless of whether it's a done deal or not, we should act like we have both the opportunity and ability to influence the outcome.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KB1HQH on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The more infighting I see on this topic the more I think that the NRA analogy fits.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
We need less infighting, and more inspiring. We're all able to write stuff here; let's write stuff to the powers that be and make ourselves heard.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE4ZHN on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I stated this same opinion in previous bpl threads and I feel the author of this one hit it on the head. Face it fellow hams, our combined lobby power isnt a fly speck in the ocean compared to the power the big money boys in the power industry hold. We can whine, cry, and write letters all we want, but money talks, BS walks. I still believe personally that this bpl thing is way overblown. For one thing, the entire grid will NOT be fed with this signal, only the downlead into the subscribers home. Of course the potential to radiate noise is there, but I seriously doubt that these short runs are capable of wiping out entire cities with rfi. As it stands now, power lines generate so much rfi in some areas, hams have to fight with the power compnaies just to get that fixed. This will no doubt aggravate the situation even more so, but even this age old problem hasnt shut down ham radio as we know it, it just made radio miserable for the amateurs unfortunate enough to live near one of these leaky lines. And what about areas where power lines run underground? How is the bpl signal going to radiate from underground power lines? Im still not fully convinced the sky is falling as some seem to believe. And if in fact bpl comes and wipes amateur radio out as we know it, theres always other hobbies to pursue, I can live without ham radio if Im forced to.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Well, I'm certainly not going to go down without a fight.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ok, one more time. WE ARE NOT ALONE. The following institutions have issues with BPL. (International Telecommunications Union, BBC, AMSAT, Australian Communications Authority, JARL, Natl. Academy of Sciences, N. American Shortwave Association, Natl. Public Radio, Harris Corp., Cingular Wireless, ATT, Natl. Association of Broadcasters, SBE, Verizon, and many other large institutions including other government agencies such as the NTIA). The counter BPL group is not small and is growing monthly. Also BPL investors are growing uneasy with the delays and growing negative comments.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Hams might want to consider changing their behavior
> to justify keeping their bands. As of now, anyone
> wanting to justify taking spectrum away from hams
> only has to point to their abuse of what they have.
The uses outweigh the abuses by about 30 dB, by my listening on the bands. Some of those uses have literally saved human lives.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KC0ODY on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
'AMW: "The counter BPL group is not small and is growing monthly."
I have begun to notice this as well. I saw the recent announcement on how broadcasters are joining in the anti-BPL stance. At the time, I thought that this might be the last straw for BPL, but it ain't over 'til it's over... more voices joined in our fight can only be a good thing.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KB9YZL on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Seen in a previous post:
>>>>”The NRA's Institute for Legislative Action is the most effective lobbying outfit in Washington. I wish the ARRL had one-tenth the clout that the NRA has. If that were the case, BPL would have been quashed already.”<<<<
Very probably true.
The ONLY reason the NRA has more clout than the ARRL is because of numbers. Numbers of members, and numbers of dollars! They go hand-in-hand, and these are the only kinds of numbers politicians understand. They don’t know Megahertz, Bandwidth, or Harmonics, but they do know Votes and Contributions!
This is the reality of it: How the ARS intends to deal with that reality is an entirely separate argument.
Kent Carroll
KB9YZL
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> The ARRL has been an organization of extra class
> operators for extra class operators, not concerned
> about tech license class operators and not concerned
> at all about the future of amateur radio as they
> have strived and succeeded in keeping it in the past
> and having filters to chase thousands of people a
> year away from amateur radio. But now that they need
> financial help and public support, all of a sudden
> ALL license classes have become important and
> meaningful.
And how do you explain that most of ARRL's work defending spectrum has been focused on VHF and higher spectrum. How do you explain that VHF and above is as prominently featured in ARRL tech-info pages as is HF? How do you explain that the vast majority of ARRL's promotional material points new hams to Tech license?
Can you point to the evidence, not speculation, on which you draw your conclusion that RARL wants to chase thousands of people from amateur radio?
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> This is serious stuff, folks. If we don't write our
> representatives and make ourselves heard and let big
> bu$ine$$ win, we can kiss our hobby/service goodbye.
> You don't have to support the ARRL to make
> yourselves heard.
I agree. Any ham can do the necessary engineering studies to demonstrate the technical aspects of interference to and from BPL. Those that have done so and filed them are among those that are listed at http://wwwl.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/hyperlinks.html.
Any amateur can go to the BPL trial areas and document his or her findings to the FCC and BPL industry. Those have done so and have filed them as comments are among those that are listed at the above URL.
Any amateur can work for years to build contacts and liaisons with organziations that can help in cases like this. And many of those amateurs have drawn on those resources to help strengthen the effect of the information posted above.
Any ham can put together resource pages about BPL, such as the one at http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/PLC. If anyone here knows of links that should be added to the above page, let me know.
I do note, however, that most of those that post about how ARRL is not doing anything for amateur radio have done none of the above themselves...
But I truly do agree; it is important that hams do speak for themselves and not allow ARRL to be the lone voice speaking on their behalf. Some issues truly need all of us.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K2WH on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> The ARRL has been an organization of extra class
> operators for extra class operators, not concerned
> about tech license class operators and not concerned
> at all about the future of amateur radio as they
> have strived and succeeded in keeping it in the past
> and having filters to chase thousands of people a
> year away from amateur radio. But now that they need
> financial help and public support, all of a sudden
> ALL license classes have become important and
> meaningful.
Where does this stuff come from? What an out of touch idiot.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W9WHE on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD6NXI:
Since [you say] us hobbyists have no chance against BPL, I assume you are selling your equipment NOW, while prices are still high. No? You are not selling? Don't tell me that you prefer to buy high and sell after the market for ham equipment has collapsed?
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WB2AZE on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
One question that needs to be addressed is that " Will the local volunteer fire or first aid squad" be affected by BPL? Will the pagers go off when there is an fire, accident or heart attack? Our paging system was on 33 MHZ. Will the tones go off followed by a clear message or static and hash? From what I remember as an ex-vollie, 90% of the Fire Depts in the US are still Volunteer and the percentage for first aid squads are similar.
Congress may or may not care about us hams, but when the voting public does not get the ambulance they called for or the fire engine to respond, then public outcry may get something to be done!!!
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE4PJW on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>I live in a rural area about 6.5 miles outside of the
>city. In town you can get DSL and Cable broadband
>service. Out here you are lucky if your dial up connects
>at 21,600 and, when it does connect it's prone to random
>disconnects, stalls and dropped packets and lets not
>forget the ridiculous latency times which have made
>playing any online game next to impossible. If you
>attempt to get the phone company to fix your problems
>sooner or later it will come out that you are using the
>line for dial up and your problem is related as such. At
>this point they will become quite hostile, and possibly
>attempt to force you to sign papers that will require
>you to pay a service charge just to look at the lines
>even if you know for certain it's on their side of the
>demarcation box.
You should be able to get 126k ISDN. Works great for me.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W9WHE on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
WB2AZE wonders:
"One question that needs to be addressed is that " Will the local volunteer fire or first aid squad" be affected by BPL? Will the pagers go off when there is an fire, accident or heart attack?"
It is not at all clear to me that the impact to FM will be as severeas the impact to AM & SSB
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE0XL on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This the end. In a few years the HF rigs you have will be paper weights. I will be able to say in less then 5 years I out lived HF radio. Why the gloom?
Blame it on the Republican controlled FCC. Blame it on the power industry. They will build their communications systems on the backs of their rate payers. Do not send you money to the pathetic ARRL. The staff at the ARRL are more interested in their annuity fund then ham radio. See ya on 1.2 GHz.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KZ9G on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE0XL:
This is a pathetic and sad commentary...
ALL:
We need to constantly fight to protect the bands we presently have. It is just a fact of live in today's "RF hungry" world. Please write or email your U.S. Congressman and Senator to support the Amateur Radio Spectrum Protection Act, HR 713.
By the way, if the ARRL does not fight for the rights of hams nationwide, who will? Does any other national organization have the wherewithal and history to fight for us? I think not. I may not like everything they do, but they DO represent my interests and me for the most part.
I know someone said it earlier, but it’s true: "United we stand, divided we fall." Please support the ORGANIZED efforts of longstanding amateur radio organizations. It's the only sensible thing to do these days.
73.
|
| |
|
Germany says no to PLC/PLT/BPL at the EU regulator
|
|
|
by N1OL on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Key words from the German statement.
“German Government does not regard a European legal framework which results in general freedom to use PLC as desirable at the present time, because Germany has a lot of negative experience with the compatibility of radio networks and line-bound networks. Initial findings about PLC applications suggest that, despite contrary assurances by the manufacturers, the ceilings in force nationally cannot be adhered to.”
“The Joint Working Group at CENELEC/ETSI on mandate M/313 of the European Commission to develop an EMC conformity standard for telecommunications networks and equipment is still far from solving its task. Judging by the present status of the discussions, we believe there is little likelihood of a useful and practical outcome.”
Below is the full text
Contribution by the German delegation RSC 1.10.2003
Comments on the
"Working Document on broad band communication through power lines" RSCOM03-12
The eEurope 2005 Action Plan contains a comprehensive and ambitious concept for the EU-wide use of broad band services in the member states. In this context, the German Government welcomes the Commission’s initiative to create more competition in the last mile. The Commission regards power line communication (PLC) as an appropriate technology for this. The regulatory barriers are to be discussed by all sides and removed this autumn. The Radio Spectrum Committee (RSC), the Communication Committee (COCOM), the EMC Working Party and the Telecommunication Conformity Assessment and Market Surveillance Committee (TCAM) are covering the various aspects. A joint workshop is planned for Brussels in October. The Commission hopes that this comprehensive dialogue will produce a consensus which would be taken up in a recommendation on the basis of Article 19 of the new framework directive.
The German Government does not regard a European legal framework which results in general freedom to use PLC as desirable at the present time, because Germany has a lot of negative experience with the compatibility of radio networks and line-bound networks. Initial findings about PLC applications suggest that, despite contrary assurances by the manufacturers, the ceilings in force nationally cannot be adhered to.
The Joint Working Group at CENELEC/ETSI on mandate M/313 of the European Commission to develop an EMC conformity standard for telecommunications networks and equipment is still far from solving its task. Judging by the present status of the discussions, we believe there is little likelihood of a useful and practical outcome.
The interconnection of equipment in PLC networks involves not only the compatibility aspect, as reflected in the EMC directive, but also a technical communications-related aspect when the signals are transmitted via the connecting cable; cf. illustration. Merely by being present between two appliances, each of which in isolation meets the relevant EMC rules, the transmission path acts as an antenna.
/ / Connecting cable / /
/Appliance/---o---------------------------------------o---/Appliance/
/ / / /
Source Transmission path Sink
= Antenna
It is true that the antenna effect can be minimised using modern technology, but it varies widely from appliance to appliance, depending on the cabling technology and the type of cable. A PLC network has many such small individual antennas, all of which together have a cumulative effect. In the past, measurement flights to check interference caused by cable networks in Germany have found that much greater interference is measured on board an aircraft than on the ground, and that this is due to the geographical cumulation.
In Germany, the simultaneous use of frequencies for radio purposes on the one hand and within and along lines on the other represents an extraordinary compatibility problem. This particularly affects services which uphold public safety and therefore require particular protection. Here, it must not be forgotten that line-bound applications can be protected by shielding, but that this is not true of radio applications. Not only air traffic needs to be able to deploy the frequencies it uses absolutely free of interference: other safety-related services like the police, fire brigades, civil disaster support and of course national defence also have an essential need for protection. There are a large number of frequencies worthy of protection which are in no way harmonised on a European basis. They split the spectrum into many sub-bands.
For radio signals to be of commercial use, they must be above the background noise or below it and capable of being filtered out. If the overall background noise rises due to large-scale PLC use, it will be necessary to transmit the desired signals of other applications at higher power or to accept interference. This would counteract the real sense of, for example, short wave, i.e. transmission over large distances at low power. The transmission at higher power would result not only in costs for new transmission facilities, correspondingly higher energy costs and a further increase in the general noise level, but also in a new certification of the transmitter with new protective distances.
Every approach which results in more competition is welcomed and accepted by Germany. But genuine competition can only take place once mature, compatible technologies are available on the market and compete with each other.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WD5ACP on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
BPL may never get off the ground - so to speak... The cost is still high compared to wireless.
I know there are security issues with WiFi, but they are being addressed. Within the next 2 or 3 years, we'll see a new standard, 801.16. Wider-Fi
The 802.16 standard enables transfer at the rate of 70 million bits per second to another antenna thirty miles away (operating at frequencies between 2 GHz and 11 GHz).
32 miles! Low cost!
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by TECH2003 on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Yes, it's all true. Ham radio is dying out and will very soon be gone. All your ham gear will be ueless. Your only chance of minimizing the losses is to sell me your radios, towers, amps etc at bottom dollar.
I'll give $100 for an FT-1000MP Mark V, Alpha Amp, and US Tower HDX689. And you deliver it to my door. What else are you going to do? The sky is falling, hurry up!
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AH6NJ on October 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If it "were" to come to my neighborhood (and it won't because Hawaii is 25 years behind the rest of the world) BPL would have no chance against HAM Radio...Hee Hee.....
Kelly, AH6NJ
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD5YDY on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Reality Check: Isn't BPL supposed to be serving the rural communities that have no other means of obtaining broadband services? Why is everyone throwing in their chips so soon? BPL won't be found in major metropolitain, suburban areas. So what's the big deal here?
Is the biggest threat to those country folk with those 200 foot towers and gigantic antenna farms will be the ones affected. Those of us living with stealth operations because of CC&R or mobile HF aren't gonna be hurt by BPL. So alot of hoopla about a "dying hobby" when it really means that even if BPL goes through, a few very "big stations" will succumb to BPL interfence. Kinda levels the playing field don't you think? Where did the idea come from that BPL would be ubiquitous, everywhere. That's not what I understood from the BPL proposal.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD54KY, that's the bait. Later comes the switch. The money is in the city, not the country.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Sorry, I meant KD5YDY. Haven't had my coffee yet.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KX2S on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
BPL all the way!
LOOK above and see the state of ham radio today.
Another 20 or 30 years ham radio will be history.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WA3KYY on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KD5YDY
The first place this is being rolled out for real is in Manasass, VA one of the test sites. According to a press release by a town spokesman, consumers will be able to sign up for the service within 120 days of the signing of the contract. Manasass is hardly rural America but is a bedroom community outside of Washington, DC.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W9WHE on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KE0XL writes:
"Blame it on the Republican controlled FCC".
Rubbish.
The real impetus for BPL is democrats, because "its not fair that high speed internet costs so much" so we need yet another pipe to drive down costs so everybody can afford it. Blame democrats for BPL, not Republicans. BPL is, after all, part of the vast left-wing conspiricy to implement euro-style socialism in the U.S.
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K7VO on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First, it is perfectly legal for a power company to implement BPL right now under existing rules. They have to comply with Part 15 power limits and have no protection from intereference and must protect licensed users from interference. What the companies pushing BPL want is higher power limits, protection from interference, and the ability to ignore whether or not they interfere with licensed services.
I agree that no amount of objection or technical data from hams will change anyone's mind at the FCC. Yes, the fix is ALWAYS in for big business. Remember 220-222 MHz?
I still don't think the BPL companies will get what they want. Objections from NTIA (government users), DOD, commercial broadcasters, aeronautical interests, etc... can't be ignored so easily. It's not all gloom and doom as the author suggests.
To W9WHE: I know you think liberal Democrats are evil and Republicans are good, but... Sorry, all the Republican FCC commissioners want BPL pushed through. The Democratic minority wants to protect existing services. Read the commissioner's comments on the subject before responding to me. You are in for a rude awakening.
73,
Caity
K7VO
|
| |
|
HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K1CJS on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If its BPL vs. only ham radio, I'd think you were right--but its BPL vs. ham radio, broadcast sw radio, public safety users, television broadcasters, the government users (NTIA) and so on and so forth, there are more lining up on the side against BPL every day.
There is no need to give up, rather we should be increasing our efforts to re-bottle the genie before it has a chance to really wreak havoc. 73 and keep on fighting!
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> If it "were" to come to my neighborhood (and it
> won't because Hawaii is 25 years behind the rest of
> the world) BPL would have no chance against HAM
> Radio...Hee Hee.....
HECO is doing a trial in Honolulu, in the general area of McCully St and S King St. It will be hard to find because it appears to involve only about 10 homes or so. It is a system made by Amperion. Look for what sounds like the worlds-worst-case of computer-monitor interference, spread out over about 5-10 MHz somewhere on HF or low VHF.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD5YDY on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The power companies must be having fantasies if they think city folk that love DSL or cable will be willing to take a chance with BPL at a higher cost. They can't afford to retrofit all their transformers and power grids to serve the whole nation. I don't buy the idea that BPL will ever become deeply established in metropolitan and suburban areas that already have cable and/or DSL through local phone company.
KD5YDY
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WT0A on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Nor will it come soon to the rural areas that do not have the fiber infrastructure to support it. Remember BPL is a "last mile" solution not a long distance transportation system.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE6I on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>spread out over about 5-10 MHz somewhere on HF or low
>VHF.
Oh well, so much for that 7Mhz change for 7.1-7.2. I'm thinking of making some ham radio recordings, just so in the future people will know what HF used to sound like.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Nor will it come soon to the rural areas that do not
> have the fiber infrastructure to support it.
> Remember BPL is a "last mile" solution not a long
> distance transportation system.
What I saw in Briarcliff Manor, NY was maybe a last-10-mile solution. The lines could be used for longer-haul stuff, with digital repeaters about every 2000 feet or so. That is one of the reasons that they want higher emissions limits -- so they can run longer distances.
Still, there have been a number of folks that have observed that truly rural areas won't support the costs of running all those repeaters for miles and miles to serve a few homes.
So this leaves the logical marketplace -- suburbia. Now, do understand that BPL will not instantly blanket the US with coast-to-coast noise. Not all utilities are buying into this now, and as the early adopters succeed or fail, others may or may not join them. But in those areas where it does deploy, if it is built to radiate at the FCC Part-15 emissions limits, the laws of antenna physics accurately predict S9-level received noise on nearby HF spectrum. How far down they need to be from Part 15 not to cause interference could range up to 60 dB -- more in some cases of very close proximity of antennas to radiating wiring, such as found in indoor apartments.
How ironic that in defending its decision not to give amateur radio regulatory protection from CC&Rs, the FCC tells hams to use mobile stations. Those will not work well at all, however, in areas where BPL is installed at the FCC limits.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Nor will it come soon to the rural areas that do not
> have the fiber infrastructure to support it.
> Remember BPL is a "last mile" solution not a long
> distance transportation system.
What I saw in Briarcliff Manor, NY was maybe a last-10-mile solution. The lines could be used for longer-haul stuff, with digital repeaters about every 2000 feet or so. That is one of the reasons that they want higher emissions limits -- so they can run longer distances.
Still, there have been a number of folks that have observed that truly rural areas won't support the costs of running all those repeaters for miles and miles to serve a few homes.
So this leaves the logical marketplace -- suburbia. Now, do understand that BPL will not instantly blanket the US with coast-to-coast noise. Not all utilities are buying into this now, and as the early adopters succeed or fail, others may or may not join them. But in those areas where it does deploy, if it is built to radiate at the FCC Part-15 emissions limits, the laws of antenna physics accurately predict S9-level received noise on nearby HF spectrum. How far down they need to be from Part 15 not to cause interference could range up to 60 dB -- more in some cases of very close proximity of antennas to radiating wiring, such as found in indoor apartments.
How ironic that in defending its decision not to give amateur radio regulatory protection from CC&Rs, the FCC tells hams to use mobile stations. Those will not work well at all, however, in areas where BPL is installed at the FCC limits.
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE6I on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
http://www.miami.com/mld/miamiherald/business/7067944.htm
>The Raleigh-based electric utility tested the service on
>about 25 computers at north Raleigh homes and businesses
>this spring and summer. It's now expanding the trial to
>make connections available to about 500 Wake County
>homes by year's end.
Here comes another one. Imo, this is looking pretty grim right now. And, the funny thing is me, I always thought that HF would be the spectrum nobody wanted. And that VHF/UHF would have gone first. Oh well.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K1TA on October 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
-----------------------------------------------------Caitlyn K7VO writes:
To W9WHE: I know you think liberal Democrats are evil and Republicans are good, but... Sorry, all the Republican FCC commissioners want BPL pushed through. The Democratic minority wants to protect existing services. Read the commissioner's comments on the subject before responding to me. You are in for a rude awakening.
------------------------------------------------------
Caitlyn is correct here. The Notice Of Inquiry (NOI) that would abolish the Part 15 Emission Limits on BPL is sponsored by Commissioner Kathleen Abernathy a Republican Bush appointee and a very uninformed one at that ! The Republicans hold a 3 to 2 majority on this commission. 4 of the 5 Commissioners were newly appointed 2 years ago. Michael Powell the Commission Chair is the only hold over from the previous commission.
This commission seems to be doing everything in its power to thumb its nose at its responsibility to "serve the public interest". Within the last year Michael Powell put forth a major initiative to raise the ownership limits for Broadcast TV and Radio Stations. Included in conjunction with this is the cross ownership between broadcast and newspapers. This initiative touch a hot button with a large number of activist and community groups over the entire spectrum of political opinion in this country. Despite a ground swell of public comment against the initiative Powell with the help of his cronies ram rodded his measure through the commission. There were hundreds of those of letters nearly unanimous in its opposition to the measure. Groups that are polar opposites like Brent Bozells Focus on the Family to the National Organization of Women sent comments to the Commission. Despite Powells success in bludgeon the Commission to get his way the public opposition did not stop. The Senate's Department of Commerce, the Senate Agency to which the FCC reports, was lobbied extensively by these same groups. The Chair of the Commerce Committee , Senator Ernest (Fritz) Hollings D SC, held open hearings at which the 5 Commissioners were required to testify. The questioning was intense and of all of the commissioners Michael Copps who opposed the measure gave the most cogent and informed responses. Commissioner Abernathy answers were full of fluff and flowery statements and almost totaly devoid of content ! I was lead to believe that she had little if any direct knowledge of the matter at hand. The matter was brought to a full floor debate and vote in both the House and Senate. The House which has a Republican Majority passed the measure. The Senate which has a Democrat majority opposed the measure but was unable to garner a Super Majority to over ride the House. The Bill was signed by the President when a small community group in NY mounted a legal challenge to the measure. They were able find a judge that read through their briefs and found standing to stay the implementation of the measure hold evidenturary hearings on it.
Why do I bring this up ? Two Reasons
1) Because this matter was challenged by ordinary citizens that had absolutely no backing from powerful economic interests. And they have thus far successfully repelled the measure. In doing so they have generated a HUGE base of public support and awareness. My point here is that while the wheels of power are greased by money government can be pushed into responding to public pressure if the opposition sizable, persistent, cunning and determined. It won't be easy but it can be done. I see no reason why a successfully effort can not be mounted in this instance. But one thing is for sure if the amateur radio adopts the attitude that the situation is hopeless and rings its hands in frustration we will lose the battle to sink BPL before we even start !
One previous post compared the ARRL to the NRA in an effort to paint a picture of futility. While the ARRL is no where near the size of the NRA I can tell you that in private conversations I have had with friends in the legal business the ARRL is well known. I have been told a number of times by legal professionals that were unaware that I am a licensed amateur "the Ham Radio community has a tight lobby in the ARRL". Don't sell yourselves short.
2) Up until as few as 10 years ago the FCC was considered a sleepy backwater in government that is no longer the case. Only insiders knew of the procedures and mechanism used by the FCC to write rules. And I'm willing to bet that even a sizable majority of the Ham Radio only have the vaguest idea of what an NPRM is, or a NOI, or a Report & Order or how long the Reply Comment Period is an NPRM. How many Hams know the FCC serves the Senate's Department of Commerce. Knowing these facts goes a long ways axiomizing the power of one's actions. The battle cry of "write your congressman" sounds sophomoric to say the least. File comments to the NOI with the commission. It can be easily done online and the process is open to the ordinary citizen. Then if you're not satisfied write a letter addressed to the nearest member of the Senate Department of Commerce. Make sure your Cc a copy to all of the other Department members along with both your Senators and your member of congress.
Since the 1996 Telecomm Bill a small but fast growing base of civic activists and activist groups have become very familiar with the internal the internal workings of the FCC and they are using their new found knowledge to influence the Commissions Proceedings to obtain outcomes more to their liking. There are solid oppourtunities for coalitions to be built which can leverage an outcome that will kill BPL. One would hope the ARRL would take the lead in this matter. Fortunately for our side we have one thing working for us, the ignorance of certain segments FCC. Like the media consolidation measure the FCC has failed to realize what a hornets' nest they have stumbled into. With knowledge and perseverance BPL could be quickly reversed but one thing is for sure. IT'S NOT GOING TO HAPPEN BY ITSELF !
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by AH6NJ on October 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I'm located 250 miles from Honolulu. Out here, they still shoot out the insulators on the power poles if they don't like HELCO!
73,
Kelly, AH6NJ
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KE6I on October 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Looking a little grim for ham radio right now. I don't quite agree with the tone of the top article here, but I'm starting to believe we have a good chance of losing this. Maybe we need to complain, every time a news article mentions BPL, that they should be talking about interference problems too.
http://newsobserver.com/24hour/technology/story/1034051p-7260315c.html
The Raleigh, N.C., company (Progress) is experimenting with technology that allows it to carry high-speed Internet traffic using a combination of electric lines and wireless links.
...
So the company now is expanding the trial, aiming to make connections available to about 500 Wake County homes by year's end.
..
Power companies for years have been considering ways to broaden the use of their transmission lines. About a dozen utility companies are testing broadband over power lines, said Mark Gedris, a spokesman for the United Power Line Council in Washington.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD6NXI on October 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It doesn't go over fiber it goes over the power cables themselves.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by WT0A on October 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
And how does it get to the power cables, magic?
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W9WHE on October 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K7VO writes:
"This commission seems to be doing everything in its power to thumb its nose at its responsibility to "serve the public interest".
The "public interest" is in the eyes of the beholder.
As a Ham, you are outnumbered 1,000 to 1 in the US. So... is in the public's best intest to provide low cost internet for 1,000 people or a free hobby for 1 person? You see how things look from the other side of the coin?
Don't get me wrong. I'm against BPL, but I'm honest enough to recognize that there is another side to the coin. And before you start howling about interference to P.S., show me evidence as to actual interference to FM, which is what P.S. typically use. Now, before you give me that public service jazz, save it. Go and read the current thread RE: does the FCC know we exist".
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by K7LAS on October 23, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"As long as we have a republican administration in power,"
Ok, moron. I guess you vote 'Rat and support the socialist agenda they intend to impose on America.
And before you start - the economic down turn started when BlowJob Clintoon still had 9 months left in his Oral office.
Justify "Republicans for big business" agsinst a spineless 'Rat president that had several chances to apprehend OSB before 9/11 happened - yet took no action to defend this nation.
You bring politics into the game - so will I.
I'd just as soon have a gov that is pro-big business (all business, for that matter) than a 'Rat party that is step by step taking this country apart - intentionally.
Who wants to increase taxes? Indeed, who does increase taxes at every opportunity? 'Rats. Fed and State level. Why? What do they want the money for?
Well it's to pay for all those wonderful programs they dream up - like supporting everyone that does not work with income (yours and mine!).
What party wants to outlaw religion? The 'Rats, of course. Just lool at who is behind the effort to remove religion / mention of God, etc., from schools. Remove the 10 Commandments.
What party whole heartedly supports the gay / queer / homo agenda? The 'Rats, of course. They tell me that I have to let an admitted homo be my son's Boy Scout leader. Right.
What party whole heartedly supports state sponsored murder - abortion. The 'Rats, of course.
What party wants to implement socialized medical care for "EVERYONE" ? The 'Rats, of course. By the way, me and will pay for that.
I'm tired of typing - listing what is wrong with the 'Rats and Lib's.
And you slam the Republicans. Go back to sleep now. When you wake up, your dream will have come true.
You will be in a socialist state - run by the 'Rats.
Good luck.
Mark K7LAS
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by BOB27 on October 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"How many are active? Our best guess is around 250,000 to 300,00 that get on the air with some degree of regularity. Now that we have that cleared up, lets look at why Dan does not have cable or DSL"
Jim, something you must also remember is that not all of the estimated 300,000 regular hams are opposed to BPL. Many of us believe the perceived threats to amateur radio are overstated and we welcome BPL. When you consider this, the number of hams opposed to BPL becomes even smaller.
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W1RFI on October 24, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> Many of us believe the perceived threats to amateur
> radio are overstated and we welcome BPL.
And not a single ham who has been to one of the BPL trial areas with a receiver feels that way.
I have explained the scientific basis for ARRL's concerns. To what can you point that demonstrates why the threat to HF from BPL is overstated?
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KA0MR on October 25, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Society has no chance politically in today's world. Our Senate and House seats are for sale to the highest bidder in regular 2, 4 and 6 years intervals. Society's elected officials no long are able to be responsible to protect us from potetntial problems that will be created by the CEO's of Corporate America because they all have finacial interests in all of them. Take Vice-President Cheney for example and he is only one of hundreds in both party lines. He IS Haliburton the very name being talked about in fuel oricing schemes in Iraq and plywood overcharging schemes in the Kosovo restructuring. Although his holdings are in a blind trust all that means is he has no active participations in the investments but all of his friends can. So our polictically system has been reduced to a bribery mechanism from top to bottom.
So hang, sit back and there ain't nothing we can do because we have no money to enter into the political bidding process.
Bob KAØMR
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by W9WHE on October 27, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
What typical liberal whining! They just don't get it!
Elected officials need to be re-elected. That means, "siociety" as you call it must vote for them. If "siociety" does not vote for them, they go home.
Your real problem is that most modern politicians understand that without business, there are no jobs. No business, no jobs. I suppose liberals would prefer giving the business to the FRENCH Petro-fina!
Better an AMERICAN company then the French!
|
| |
|
RE: HAM Radio Has No Chance Against BPL
|
|
|
by KD6SZB on October 28, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now, if it's true that BPL is proposed to be used at 5Ghz, I don't see a problem for the bands below that frequency. I'm not an engineer, so maybe I'm wrong. I think it's trial balloon hype from front to back. They appear to be using the public as a focus group. If I remember antenna theory correctly, if an open wire between a "transmitter" and a "receiver" is beyond a certain length it will act as very long longwire (several wavelengths) and radiate/couple all energy to space. Seeing as how 5Ghz has a 60mm wavelength, well, like I said, I'm not an engineer, but...
Sorry for off-topic below, but...
Now, as for KD7EFQ making it a political issue by taking stabs at a party opposite his because the Democrat Party isn't in control any more, Sour Grapes. To wit:
> They always side with big business and screw the little guy.
Well, the last administration not only screwed the little AND the big guy with taxes, "he" did a good job on a stupid, naive "little girl", while in wedlock. Good example to set for our young "potential" amateurs (which is my point).
Now, on to what really chapped my hide:
> I personally am not interested in VHF/ UHF except for HT/emergency service work, so if HF goes away, I'm DONE with amateur Radio.
Now, as far as not finding anything of value above 10M, you just go ahead stay on HF. While you're at it, why not set up a lobby group to bring back spark-transmission "protocols". Or, you could get your butt on a repeater, welcome aboard a new amateur and show him or her the ropes and a taste of General Class buy letting them operate your HF rig as a guest. If not, please, do us all a favor and be "DONE with amateur Radio", now. People with your political, elitist attitude which also brought about incentive licensing are THE primary causes of amateur radio evaporating right from under our noses. It is not, and never was the VHF/UHF amateur bands, TV, Gameboys(R), the internet, computers, BPL(I hope), moon spots or CB boogeymen.
Hasta...
|
| |
|
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!
Response to NY Times BPL Article
New Restrictions on BPL in Australia:
An Opportunity to Gain Co-Sponsors for H.R. 691
'Twas The Night Before BPL Ruling
Other Opinion Articles
How Social Networking Can Help Ham Radio
Don't Knock It!
Knobs and SDRs (Software Defined Radios)
EMP a Real Threat to Hams and the USA
High Speed Packet?
|
