|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deployment Of BPL:
from
NTIA
on
April 28, 2004
Website:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/
View comments about this article!
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deployment Of BPL:
Full story at:
http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fccfilings/2004/bpl/index.html
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Paragraph 3-5 of the cover letter say it all. This technology is based on politics and not science. It makes me sick to think that the "elected" leaders believe that broadband is of such National importance that it must come about regardless of what the technology lays to waste.
The final paragraph of the cover letter states:
"I look forward to continuing to work with you to achieve the responsible implementation of this exciting new technology as we meet the President's goal of making affordable broadband competitively available to all Americans by 2007."
Since when is it the job of the NTIA to usher new techologies to the market place for the common American? I am disgusted by this administration and it's clear goal to put the interests of the few ahead of those of the nation.
Send a message to Washington to remind them, that we, the people are in charge and that come Novemeber, we will exercise our power and make it very clear that we dislike what is happening.
Clearly BPL is going to happen, regardless of the consequence to the radio spectrum. Lookout tax payers, we are going to get the bill soon enough for this mess.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA3KYY on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I agree the cover letter leaaves much to be desired but it is just bowing to the politcal winds. The Executive Summary is much more critical citing interference to aircraft HF receivers at distances of 40Km from the center of a large-scale BPL deployment to cite one example. It also states the proposed measurement techniques are not correct for this type of BPL system and that peak signal strengths well exceed the Part 15 limits. They also state that moderate to severe interference will be experienced by fixed stations at distances upwards of 200m from the Access BPL device. It also addresses the significant disruption potential to BPL by strong transmitters located close to Access BPL devices.
Lets hope the policy makers at least read the Executive Summary even if they cannot understand all the technical detail in the full report. I urge everyone to read at least the Executive Summary and then craft a specific response to various parts of the NPRM based upon the NTIA report. The commnet period closes May 3.
73,
Mike
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by N5LB on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The executive summary seems to indicate that the report is strongly in support of maintaining the Part 15 rules "as is" and further requiring tougher, standard tests of field strength.
Also, which seems in support of the ARRL position, are remarks on their NEC based simulation of aggregation. In short they find BPL signals will combine to create a wide area of disruptive interference to aircraft.
Of concern however is the implication that NTIA is concerned with government frequencies and that amateur radio may be defined as non-critical.
Again, get your comments to the Commission, calls and e-mails to Congress and the White House.
Thanks
Lionel
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by W4PA on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Send a message to Washington to remind them, that we, >the people are in charge and that come Novemeber, we >will exercise our power and make it very clear that >we dislike what is happening.
Yup - I gotta remember to go get a "Republicans For Kerry" bumper sticker at the novelty shop this week.
Of all the issues that face this country, I never thought I would decide my choice in a Presidential election based on ham radio. Who would have thought?
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by K4IA on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Two observations:
1. Amateur frequencies are not among those listed as deserving of special protection in section 4-6. That section deals only with government uses. No one else deserves protection? As I have long suspected, and seen from personal experience, the "powers that be" do not take seriously amateur's contribution to emergency communications. We are just geeks with walkie talkies who run around yelling "can you hear me now?"
2. There is no analysis of propagated BPL interference. The theory is mentioned as one *way* radio waves travel but there is no serious discussion of exactly how *far* these beasties might travel. Surely there is data on the exact power output of these systems and relative field strengths from which many programs can plug in a sunpsot number and tell you the liklihood of being heard half-way around the world. Why is all the emphasis on what you hear 30 feet from the antenna (whoops, I mean power line)?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
<<<<
i have read the summary, but i was pointing out the the cover letter shows the true colors of the NTIA's overall plan - to be in compliance with the President's goal.
does it really matter what the study says if the head of the NTIA makes it very clear that he will do what he needs to help make the President's goal a reality?
they can spend millions on reports to have them ignored - they have done that for years in the government - why change that now?
the report is detailed and the summary more direct on the implications and possibility of interference and the ramifications of that interference.
again, my point was simply that the cover letter watered down the report and showed that the NTIA was onboard with the Broadband plan.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
<<<<
i have read the summary, but i was pointing out the the cover letter shows the true colors of the NTIA's overall plan - to be in compliance with the President's goal.
does it really matter what the study says if the head of the NTIA makes it very clear that he will do what he needs to help make the President's goal a reality?
they can spend millions on reports to have them ignored - they have done that for years in the government - why change that now?
the report is detailed and the summary more direct on the implications and possibility of interference and the ramifications of that interference.
again, my point was simply that the cover letter watered down the report and showed that the NTIA was onboard with the Broadband plan.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
<<<<
i have read the summary, but i was pointing out the the cover letter shows the true colors of the NTIA's overall plan - to be in compliance with the President's goal.
does it really matter what the study says if the head of the NTIA makes it very clear that he will do what he needs to help make the President's goal a reality?
they can spend millions on reports to have them ignored - they have done that for years in the government - why change that now?
the report is detailed and the summary more direct on the implications and possibility of interference and the ramifications of that interference.
again, my point was simply that the cover letter watered down the report and showed that the NTIA was onboard with the Broadband plan.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
<<<<
i have read the summary, but i was pointing out the the cover letter shows the true colors of the NTIA's overall plan - to be in compliance with the President's goal.
does it really matter what the study says if the head of the NTIA makes it very clear that he will do what he needs to help make the President's goal a reality?
they can spend millions on reports to have them ignored - they have done that for years in the government - why change that now?
the report is detailed and the summary more direct on the implications and possibility of interference and the ramifications of that interference.
again, my point was simply that the cover letter watered down the report and showed that the NTIA was onboard with the Broadband plan.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
If you would read past the cover letter, you would find that the study is quite comprehensive and jives with the ARRLs findings for the most part.
<<<<
i have read the summary, but i was pointing out the the cover letter shows the true colors of the NTIA's overall plan - to be in compliance with the President's goal.
does it really matter what the study says if the head of the NTIA makes it very clear that he will do what he needs to help make the President's goal a reality?
they can spend millions on reports to have them ignored - they have done that for years in the government - why change that now?
the report is detailed and the summary more direct on the implications and possibility of interference and the ramifications of that interference.
again, my point was simply that the cover letter watered down the report and showed that the NTIA was onboard with the Broadband plan.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
why did my reply show up 5 times?
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KT0DD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W4PA Wrote:
>Yup - I gotta remember to go get a "Republicans For Kerry" bumper sticker at the novelty shop this week.
Of all the issues that face this country, I never thought I would decide my choice in a Presidential election based on ham radio. Who would have thought?
Hey Scott, You might want to think again about Kerry, I just read an article on MSN.com that he wants the Dept.of Defense to get into Broadband.
It didn't specify BPL, but we all know what the Govt. is capable of. Unless we could have the amateur spectrum protected with the MARS frequencies, he may sell us out as well. Make your vote count for what it's really worth, Vote for Mickey Mouse (HI HI). 73.
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by KA3POY on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Amateurs posting comments about making their sentiments felt in November, Republicans for Kerry, etc, might want to present evidence confirming your apparent belief that the candidate you are contemplating voting for has a position that is different from that of the incumbents, and more sympathetic to amateur radio concerns.
All the material that I have seen indicates that virtually all mainstream candidates of both parties support government intervention to accelerate the adoption of broadband. If outraged amateurs are considering voting Democrat because they sense that Democrats are less inclined than Republicans to insert the federal government into private commerce, then I for one would be sincerely interested to see evidence that confirms this belief. My personal experience FWIW is not consistent with that hypothesis.
best regards,
N5IIT
was KA3POY
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KB3KAQ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
the message to Washington remark is meant to be taken that we have representative government in the US and that if those elected to represent us wish to stay in the elected office, then they need to represent the people and not business interests.
i make no claim as to who is a better candidate or which party is best. simply that we can fire those making the decisions if we don't like the decisions they are making in our place.
who will gain from BPL? there are more than enough competing technologies and the most promising long term rural broadband solutions are wireless.
get out your foil hats, conspiracy theorist believe BPL is needed to start a phase of government spying. anything electric can now have a MAC address and report back to HQ where you are. they will know who has what with all the smart tags that you can't see...
but that is just plain silly. the reason BPL is being pushed so hard is that someone believes it will make them richer than now and they have bought the current adminstration's ear.
-steve hanlon
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I just read the executive summary. It says, yea BPL can work, but requires that there be no relaxation of Part 15 rules and that BPL operators turn down the power and notch certain frequencies when necessary. This sounds like a suspicious position to take in order to support the FCC in this matter. Interpretation: If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck, its a duck. BPL implementation will cause interference. By the way Scott your comments surprise me. You don't see ICOM, Yaesu or Kenwood company representatives taking political positions on this matter. Stick to radios and not politics. Your comments may hurt your company's sales.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by N3IJW on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KAQ:
Yes, I agree the cover letter is pretty much outright political posturing. All five times you mentioned it :)
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KE4MOB on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Here is the most striking part of the whole report:
"Assuming that co-frequency BPL devices are deployed at a density of one per km2 within a circular area of 10 km radius, interference to aircraft reception of moderate-to-strong radio signals is likely to occur below 6 km altitude within 12 km of the center of the BPL deployment. Interference likely would occur to aircraft reception of weak-to-moderate radio signals within 40 km of the center of the BPL deployment area."
Talk about radio smog.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by K2WH on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This report specifically states what we all know. BPL will interfere with other radio services. I think we all knew that. Why the study?
Since NTIA has come out somewhat negatively against BPL deployement, the people really pissed now must be the utilities that want to get this going.
The NTIA report just makes it alot harder to really get this off the ground. The utilities have a lot of hoops to jump through here and it may not be worth it.
K2WH
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KT0DD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Last weekend, over 800,000 Anti Abortion activists went in person to Washington to protest Bush's abortion policies.
We have over 700,000 licensed amateurs in the USA. Yet, we generated MAYBE 5000 comments on the FCC website protesting BPL. SAD! Maybe we need to take a lesson from the above group. If we are going to fight this, we need large numbers involved, writing the president and congress to get the previous posters message across that government is for the people, not corporations.
However, if we just remain apathetic, well, don't cry when your equipment becomes unuseable. 73.
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by W5LSD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
""It also addresses the significant disruption potential to BPL by strong transmitters located close to Access BPL devices""
...............................................
an eye for an eye and QRM for QRM,
this will be the fun part of BPL !
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by K2WH on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KT0DD,
"We have over 700,000 licensed amateurs in the USA. Yet, we generated MAYBE 5000 comments on the FCC website protesting BPL. SAD! Maybe we need to take a lesson from the above group. If we are going to fight this, we need large numbers involved, writing the president and congress to get the previous posters message across that government is for the people, not corporations.
However, if we just remain apathetic, well, don't cry when your equipment becomes unuseable. 73."
This is exactly correct. I have a website where I disseminate all information (stuff I can find) about BPL progress, test areas and its potential for interference. I have done this for at least the past year, yet out of the large number of members on this site, nary a whisper or response to my msgs or any discussion about the issue. I feel like i'm posting notices on a useless cork board. I think maybe I am lucky in that I can devote lots of my time to ham radio. Other amateurs have different agendas, kids, wives, school, PTA, camp etc. I operate each and every day of the year on HF and VHF because I do not have the above list of things to contend with except for the wife part and 2 dogs.
Even now with the BPL Invasion on our doorstep, the blase attitude amongst most amateurs reigns supreme. Perhaps Amateur Radio has had its day as did the dinosaurs. It is sad that (i'm willing to bet) most amateurs are so out of touch with the hobby that still today, they never even heard of BPL. To this day, the only discussions heard about BPL are off the air and on forums like this which basically serve no purpose.
Maybe it is time for a march on Washington, but I fear maybe about 500 or less will show and maybe it is time for a general strike. A strike of ham radio when all nets, general conversation, Red Cross support, clubs etc. all things associated with amateur radio go dark, silent for 1 month. A total global or US blackout. Sort of a silent protest against this garbage that is called BPL. Maybe, just maybe, someone in power will recognize the criticality of this situation and put a stop to all this nonsense.
K2WH
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by N5LB on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
We need to be careful about making threats of interference to BPL. We know that amateur HF transmissions will interfere with BPL. Everyone knows that.
Does anyone recall "quiet hours" in the early days of TVI.
Threats to deliberatley interfere exacerbates the problem and makes ham operators look bad. Proponents of BPL will gladly generalize that all ham operators are light on technical knowledge and heavy on bad behavior. This could be as much a PR issue as a technical one. Lets hope some of us don't also make it a criminal issue.
I doesn't require much in the way of words added to Part 97 restrict or abolishe our HF privileges.
You can also comment more than once to the commission as new information is made public.
I think the "line in the sand" comments from the NC utility deserve special attention and comment.
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA4ET on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I read the opening letter, then I read the rest.
IF you havent read the entire volume 1, it makes interesting reading
I have to tell you, it seemed pretty negative toward BPL to me. I can hardly find any statements that would make anybody want to run out and spend 20 million on investment to give broadband to a bunch of farmers or hillbillies who cant afford phones, of the computers to use it in the first place. This whole BPL stuff is a joke.
THe only place it will be economocaly feasible is in high density population. The report almost states as much, and even goes ruther on to say, as you increase the density of the repeaters to incompess more people,, meaning larger areas, the abient interferance level would increase.
THe whole thing sounded like a nail in the coffin to me
DAvid
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by CWTITAN on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
ALL THE MORE REASON WHY "CW" IS SO IMPORTANT. THE SPEED REQUIREMENT FOR CW SHOULD BE 20 WPM ACROSS THE BOARD FOR ALL HAMS....
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KT0DD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K2WH,
Well, I'm glad it seems we've reached a subject we both agree on, and I applaud your efforts. I have written 2 congressman here in Wyoming, and I've used the link provided by the ARRL to its members to write directly to the President at the White House. (Fat chance he'll ever see my letter directly) But if enough letters are sent in conjunction with the NTIA report, Just maybe we can open some eyes and ears.
Keep up the Good work K2WH.
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA4ET on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
FROM N5LN"
We need to be careful about making threats of interference to BPL. We know that amateur HF transmissions will interfere with BPL. Everyone knows that. Does anyone recall "quiet hours" in the early days of TVI. "
BPL in unprotected, TV's are, as is Amatuer radio ,, and NTIA states the no relaxing of the current part 15 requirements should be considerd
That was another nail in the coffin as far as I am concerned,,,, What happens on a major contest weekend,,, BPL would be toast. You might get into a fist with your niehor,, but as far as the FCC in concerned, we have the right of way.
Another satement in the NTIA statemt is,, need for BPL to locate Hams as to avoid them during a BPL deployment.........THats a good one to.. ANOTHER nail in the coffin
FROM N5LN"
"I think the "line in the sand" comments from the NC utility deserve special attention and comment."
I aggree with that totally,, that sounds like a challenge to me
DAvid
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In APP C they do state that hams are important
part of disaster communications and list
the ham bands below 30 MHz.
Also, they mention MARS, but somehow the CAP
got left out, or at least I did not see it.
They did mention SHARES.
Realize that NTIA is part of DOC and, of course,
support the President. However, I think they
want the broadband access by other than BPL, if you
read on through the report. The restrictions
that they ask the FCC to place on BPL seem to
add more dollars to the cost of fielding it.
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by W4PA on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>By the way Scott your comments surprise me.
You don't see ICOM, Yaesu or Kenwood company representatives taking political positions on this matter. Stick to radios and not politics. Your comments may hurt your company's sales.<<<
Interesting - that means I have to exempt myself from taking a position because I work for a radio manufacturer? I take exactly the opposite tack - I have a vital interest in this issue, and I feel it is important that I *do* take a position.
I am upset that non-technical political appointees that run the FCC are steering this matter. I am upset that the President of the United States is calling for revision of technical standards to make BPL possible - and could result in the death of amateur radio and injury to the company I work for. Here's the quote from 4/26/04 in case you missed it: "Power lines were for electricity; power lines can be used for broadband technology," Bush said. "So the technical standards need to be changed to encourage that."
What other option would you suggest I take? This is being directed from the very top of government.
I have a vehement objection to it, and a logical response is for me to vote out someone whom I feel is a threat both to the hobby I love and the business I manage. Am I wrong?
I haven't seen any representatives of the Japanese companies on eham.net discussing this matter - or filing response comments to the BPL NPRM's either.
My comments against BPL, filed on behalf of Ten-Tec, can be found by searching the NPRM 04-37 docket comments.
Scott Robbins, W4PA
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Scott, you can any position you want. Taking a position on BPL is one thing, taking a position on any presidential candidate puts you on the wrong side of some who would be your customers. Be smart, comment on BPL, express disappointment about a national leader's position on a matter, but let the politics go.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
RE: A Nail in the BPL Coffin
|
|
|
by K2WH on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"Critical review of the assumptions underlying these analyses revealed that
application of existing Part 15 compliance measurement procedures for BPL systems
results in a significant underestimation of peak field strength. Underestimation of the
actual peak field strength is the leading contributor to high interference risks.
As applied in current practice to BPL systems, Part 15 measurement guidelines do not address
unique physical and electromagnetic characteristics of BPL radiated emissions. Refining
compliance measurement procedures for BPL systems will not impede implementation of
BPL technology because BPL networks reportedly can be successfully implemented
under existing field strength limits.3 Accordingly, NTIA does not recommend that the
FCC relax Part 15 field strength limits for BPL systems."
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by AC0X on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Be smart, comment on BPL, express disappointment
>about a national leader's position on a matter, but
>let the politics go.
So you're saying a business can't take a political position?
Or can they not take a position that you disagree with?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WU7X on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W4PA's comments are right on.
Dale WU7X
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by K5UJ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
While you guys are arguing about something W4PA wrote and other drek, you could be using your time to contact congressmen, the White House, actually read as much as possible of the BPL NPRM and the NTIA fingings, and prepare a filing with the FCC.
Quit blowing your time aruging with each other about b.s. on the damn eham site, and go to arrl.org, find out how to write comments and contact people and expend your hot air at decision makers, not each other.
gg QRT now to follow my own advice.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by K0RFD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KB3KAQ wrote:
>we have representative government in the US and that
>if those elected to represent us wish to stay in the
>elected office, then they need to represent the people
>and not business interests.
What an idealistic view of the electoral process!
I happen to agree with you as far as the value of representative democracy.
Unfortunately, the practical part of electoral government, of representative democracy, has to do with actually getting elected in the first place. You can be the best guy in the whole world, and if you don't get elected it doesn't matter how good you are.
Getting elected is not unlike selling soap flakes. The brands are pretty much all alike, but you only win if the people buy YOUR brand. How do people sell more soap flakes than their competitors? They ADVERTISE. And that's where the money comes in.
In an ideal world, the best person wins. In the REAL world, the person with the most money to convince others that he is the best, whether he is or not, wins.
See the difference? That's where the corporations come in. They give the candidate the money to run the ads to get elected.
We vote. That's important. The power companies contribute. That's MORE important, even though it shouldn't be.
Make your thoughts known. File comments if you haven't already. Just don't be surprised if the government opts to give more importance to the the people who buy thousands of votes over our one vote. It sucks, but it's the way it is.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by K0RFD on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W4PA Wrote:
>Interesting - that means I have to exempt myself from
>taking a position because I work for a radio>
>manufacturer?
Nope, I for one consider your position welcome.
However, it does sort of lead one to ask the question, "Where does your boss stand on this?" Have you tried to get an opinion out of them? Will they (God Forbid) actually take a STAND? Probably not, because they sell far more radios to the "deep pockets" government than they do to tight-fisted hams. And from a practical sense, I suppose it doesn't really matter whether the radios they sell to the government can actually be USED for anything, so long as they sell them.
So, No, you aren't exempt from taking a position. Just remember that when it's time to take a position with your employer. Tell them how you feel. Or do they have too much leverage over you?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by N8MMZ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W4PA writes:
"Yup - I gotta remember to go get a "Republicans For Kerry" bumper sticker at the novelty shop this week.
Of all the issues that face this country, I never thought I would decide my choice in a Presidential election based on ham radio. Who would have thought?"
Well Scott, after I've liquidated the shack (I just have an FT 102 to go now!) I'm in the market for a good DSP rig to fight BPL. I was thinking about the Argonaut or Jupiter - but looks like I'm swinging towards the Icom line now.
Of all the issues that face my ham shack, I never thought I would decide my choice in a radio purchace based on a Presidential Election. Who would have thought?
Sorry - you represent Ten Tec when you speak - you have a right to express your opinion as a free citizen, but you have an obligation to your employer to temper your words. I doubt your employer holds the same position as you do. Food for thought...
By the way, didn't Kerry vote against BPL before he voted for it??? (ha ha ha....) I don't think anyone really knows what position Kerry would actually take on the issue - do we? More food for thought - Kerry has been known throughout for slash and burn on DoD procurement - that wouldn't be too good for Ten Tec's govt business would it??? You ought to think a little deeper if you're going to play politics.
Now lets quit politickin' and get back to the radio...
73s de N8MMZ - Jonathan
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KG6AMW on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I did post my comments with the FCC regarding BPL today and will likely post additional comments next month. Scott's a good guy and his company makes a really fine radio. My comments were not meant to be negative, just informative. End of issue.
KG6AMW
|
| |
|
DSP on BPL?
|
|
|
by AC0X on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>I'm in the market for a good DSP rig to fight BPL
Jeeeez.. listen. I'll say it three times
DSP WILL NOT HELP PULL OUT SIGNALS BELOW THE BPL GENERATED NOISE LEVEL
DSP WILL NOT HELP PULL OUT SIGNALS BELOW THE BPL GENERATED NOISE LEVEL
DSP WILL NOT HELP PULL OUT SIGNALS BELOW THE BPL GENERATED NOISE LEVEL
Understand?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by AC0X on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>Sorry - you represent Ten Tec when you speak - you
>have a right to express your opinion as a free
>citizen, but you have an obligation to your employer
>to temper your words.
Oh really????? Maybe in the fascist state you want to live in do we have to "temper our words" because of an "obligation to your employer", but in the country I live in you can STILL support who you want for President, be it Bush, Kerry, Nader, or freaking Mickey Mouse for that matter.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by AC0X on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>I don't think anyone really knows what position Kerry
>would actually take on the issue - do we?
At this point, no, we don't know. I suspect that BPL probably isn't an issue he's going to address in this campaign, since any information he would get on it would be just the basics. And, to someone who doesn't know the details, BPL looks good. But, the point is, the FCC DOES know the details. The ARRL studies on this, studies from BPL implementations overseas, and now even the NTIA study, all describe the severe inteference levels it causes. But the FCC chooses to IGNORE all this. They act as if all those studies are bunk and the only real reports of value come from the power companies themselves. Yes, the FCC has always been a political organization. But this time has crossed the line into insanity. When OTHER GOVERNMENT ORGANIZATIONS are publishing reports that describe the level of "radio smog" this will create and the FCC is ignoring it, something is very, very wrong.
It's almost as though they WANT to render the HF frequencies useless to comunication. I wonder why?
|
| |
|
N8MMZ
|
|
|
by L1D on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
People like you scare me. Do you really believe that W4PA should temper his comments just because of who he works for?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by N0YM on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
More food for thought - Kerry has been known throughout for slash and burn on DoD procurement - that wouldn't be too good for Ten Tec's govt business would it??? You ought to think a little deeper if you're going to play politics.
-----
Pot, Kettle, Black and all that.
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=147
http://slate.msn.com//?id=2096127&
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by W4PA on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K0RFD wrote:
>>>Nope, I for one consider your position welcome.
However, it does sort of lead one to ask the question, "Where does your boss stand on this?" Have you tried to get an opinion out of them? Will they (God Forbid) actually take a STAND? Probably not, because they sell far more radios to the "deep pockets" government than they do to tight-fisted hams. And from a practical sense, I suppose it doesn't really matter whether the radios they sell to the government can actually be USED for anything, so long as they sell them.<<<<
Yes - a stand has been taken. Go to the FCC website, search the NPRM 04-37 comments, using zip code 37862 for the comments I filed on behalf of Ten-Tec on April 23, before the NTIA report was released. The 3 page document I wrote discusses amateur radio and commercial and military applications.
If the HF spectrum is polluted it affects far more than amateur radio, and Ten-Tec is involved in more HF communications. Ship-to-shore data, military comms, air traffic control, intercept - these are but a few of the applications for our equipment. If these applications are compromised, that will affect the ability of Ten-Tec to provide equipment for use on the HF bands - whatever that use is. Government doesn't buy receivers and lock them up in a warehouse somewhere; there is too much pressure applied throught the supply chain to not waste taxpayer dollars after the abuses of Defense contractors in the 1980's (remember those $400 toilet seats?) - there has to be a demonstrated use.
Note that the NTIA in their report released on the 27th discussed the need to protect Federal frequencies and aircraft communications, but not one word was uttered about the need to protect amateur radio.
I see this from two points of view - potential destruction of a hobby that I have been actively involved in for most of my childhood and all of my adult life, and injury to the business I've been a part of for the past 9 years. My life is dominated by ham radio - I like it that way and I need to take whatever action I feel is necessary, personally, and on behalf of my employer to assure that it continues.
BTW, before we get excited over my own political proclivities, I'm registered to vote as an independent and have been since my 18th birthday. My own philosophy probably leans libertarian more than anything else. I did not vote for Bill Clinton in '92 or '96, or Al Gore in '00. I tend to call them like I see them on an election by election basis.
>>So, No, you aren't exempt from taking a position. Just remember that when it's time to take a position with your employer. Tell them how you feel. Or do they have too much leverage over you?<<<
I wouldn't be here discussing this if that were the case.
Scott Robbins, W4PA
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by KC8NMW on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I can see the headlines now in November "Election Hinges on precious Amateur Radio Vote" Ya right, give me a break. This issue may be important to us and may sway some ham's votes but not mine.
I am a republican and naturally a Bush supporter. Voted for him in 2000 plan on doing so this year. I think Kerry is one of the saddest candidates the democrats have nominated in a long time. He is a dryball with no personality, he generates zero excitement and is on both sides of every issue. Besides that he is a flaming liberal from New England with all the errogance that comes with it. (nothing against my friends up in New England).
I am not happy with Bush's support of BPL but it won't affect my vote at all. I am worried about BPL getting implemented as we all are but this is NOT a major campaing issue.
We live in America and can vote for whoever we want and for whatever reasons. Some of us will always vote democrat no matter who it is or what he supports, the same goes for republicans. That is what makes this country so great!!
I can picture what John Kerry would say to the Amateur Radio community in order to get our vote -
"I actually opposed BPL before I supported it"
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WB5HZE on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The NTIA study is an excellent piece of work that we can- and should- refer to to support our own comments. If we do not refer to it and somehow force the FCC to acknowledge the study within this NPRM proceeding, then it is possible that the FCC might <attempt to> leave the (intact) study out of the NPRM record, & then (as they have done before with some of our comments in the NOI) select only segments taken out of context during their Discussion for the R&O.
The NTIA study does not refer to the Amateur Service because the NTIA has no standing in the Amateur Service. But that really does not matter- for just about every type of radio system the NTIA describes there is a corresponding analog used by amateurs (for example, there can be little distinction between the potential for interference to a NTIA- authorized HF station on 22 MHz as compared to an amateur HF station operated on 21 MHz, or between a federal VHF mobile and an amateur VHF mobile).
This report should make it very easy for most hams to file short but meaningful comments- one approach might be to simply state strong support for the NTIA study & the ARRL comments, and then comment that:
1) the potential for interference to licensed stations in the Amateur Service is at least equal to that for NTIA- authorized stations (thus requiring at least equal protection as for an NTIA station), but that due to the high density of Amateur stations in residential settings the potential for interference FROM those amateur stations TO Access BPL is probably much greater, and
2) that it therefore would not be in the best interest of the general public to deploy BPL on MW, HF, & VHF spectrum where broadband services to the consumer might be regularly impaired due to compliant emissions by licensed stations, but that Access BPL could probably be deployed in a more effective manner within the microwave portion of the spectrum OR the amateur bands should be completely avoided by BPL operators (by applying deep notch filters within all BPL equipment).
I think that the FCC will find it very difficult to treat the NTIA in a cavalier manner (as they have done with the amateur community). Wish we had more time to digest the NTIA material & cleanly incorporate it into our own individual comments, but at least the study was released before the looming filing deadline & we should be able to get SOME leverage out of it.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
At the risk of being redundant, the NTIA
refers to hams in APP C. They give our
usefulness in emergency communications
and list the ham bands that would be
affected in the same style table as
their comms.
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report: Responsible & Professional
|
|
|
by NE1Z on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
It is amazing how much can be learned from reading the entire 2-part document. It is like a class but don't download it on dialup!
Graphics & screenshots, standards & methods. Imagine that!
When ham politics are removed, the issue is explained.
The (unbiased) NTIA did a very complete & detailed report.
Bill
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA4ET on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
by NE1Z on April 29, 2004
The (unbiased) NTIA did a very complete & detailed report.
Bill
Bill I absolutly agree,, it was very comprehensive IMHO. The only qeustion I have is, IF any one in the Bush camp actally read the report. Bush goes and spouts off about the 10 millon measurement, but forgot to mention to any buddy the they where almost all negative. I call that excutive selective memory. Its more Presidentail hype to get people to for for him, and nothing more. Its more of BUSH'S BULLSHIT agenda for his bullshit campain
Anyone how has read the report would not even let them try to think about implimenting BPL. The report paints out almost nothing good when it comes to BPL
DAvid
|
| |
|
Wash yo' mouth out with soup, young man...
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Gentlemen, Gentlemen....PLEASE
Keep it G Rated, we don't need to read potty mouth trash like this....
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA4ET on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
SORRY, but I have to call a spade, a spade, and thats how I see it. THis BPL thing is just election year spin to obtain votes. THe next thing you know, anyone that disagrees will be designated an enemy combatant to shut them up,, and thats just how I see it!! I am surprise he didnt sight national security issues to push BPL. IF he, or anyone is in campain had read the NTIA report, he would had used Nationial security issues to KILL BPL, and put it out of its misery. TO sight we must change our standards to accomidate BPL, is a statement that could have only be stated by the misinformed, thus, they never even read the report.
DAvid
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Maybe, but profanity is never justified.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
David, I guess you're trying to impress
people, but the term "call a spade, a spade"
refers to colored folks. Now you may think
Dubya is a lotta things, but are you blind.
:-)
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by WA4ET on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now you may say that was racial, but I assure YOU it was not. Such an accusation is not worthy comment. Now given the option, I can now educate you a little more. PLease read and learn, as stated by a renouned referance source
spade [ spayd ]
noun (plural spades)
digging tool: a digging tool with a wide shallow blade flattened where it meets the shaft so it can be pushed into the ground with the foot
dig or remove something with spade: to dig or remove something using a spade
[Old English spadu . Ultimately from an Indo-European word that is also the ancestor of English spoon and Greek spathç broad blade (source of English spatula and spay).]
spad·er noun
To call a spade a spade: to say plainly and bluntly what you mean without being euphemistic in any way
G'Day
DAvid
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
David, you can change it all you want..
I see you're down here in the South, too.
At least, you have a 4 call, I have not loooked
it up.
So you really know what it means!
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
BTW, for those who are not from around here,
it has nothing to do with what David said.
Refers to a suit in a poker deck that he
convieniently left out.
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by AB5XZ on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't think President Bush has time to read my letter, so I'll just send him a QSL card.
My long letter will go to the FCC's data base.
I think the NTIA has done a good, professional job in Phase I of its project. It's too bad the FCC is over-lawyered and under-engineered, and that the NTIA has to do the technical groundwork.
73TomAB5XZ
|
| |
|
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deploy
|
|
|
by N4KIT on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I found this very interesting. NTIA is advocating rules to require measurement of RF fields at or above the level of the power lines in order to accurately quantify the maximum field strength. In it's comments, the IEEE Power System Relay Committee specifically recommends NOT doing measurements within 10 lateral meters of power lines at or above the level of the line due to safety risks.
I read: "It has to be done this way ... but it can't be done this way"
It will be interesting to see how the Commission resolves this conundrum!
73 all,
Chris N4KIT
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by L1D on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Sounds like the IEEE power system relay people confused meters with feet. If this was the case I couldn't go in my backyard.
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by NE1Z on May 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
1 meter = 39.36"
What's your point?
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by KC9OD on May 1, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
And it can ALSO mean "call something what it really is".I get really tired of so-called politically correct people telling everyone what words they may/must use.
|
| |
|
RE: hold the phone.......
|
|
|
by WA4MJF on May 2, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I am NOT PC, watch your mouth!
I call a spade, a spade; a fag, a fag;
a wetback, a wetback; etc.
What I do not support, is using decsriptions
which are NOT accurate.
Ask any one that knows me, I call'um like
I see 'um. The key word here, being see.
You don't know me so, I forgive you, this time,
for calling me politically correct.
73 de Ronnie
|
| |
|
RE: NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible De
|
|
|
by WB8NUT on May 4, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
>>>>> ""It also addresses the significant disruption potential to BPL by strong transmitters located close to Access BPL devices""
...............................................
an eye for an eye and QRM for QRM,
this will be the fun part of BPL !<<<<
I might think about putting some "propagation beacons" on the air. Could be very valuable to amateurs across the world. Anyone else interested?
Duffy
www.wb8nut.com
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
VK5RJ Still Gracing the Airwaves at Age 101:
rec.radio.amateur.moderated -- 5 Yrs. Old:
Tune-In To The World -- Amateur Radio Gets People Talking:
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
|
|
|
