Re: Disappointing in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r15118192 en Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:54:30 EDT Sat, 28 Nov 2009 20:54:30 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15193636 DaDogs : Except for the fact that you make so damn much sense ...

I would take issue with you ;).
--
We dogs are NOT impressed with pussy cats.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15193636 Sat, 07 Jan 2006 16:35:18 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15145190 vpoko :
said by MysticGogeta See Profile :

Im sorry but id rather have more compatition in broadband then haveing a radio frequency i never use
Well, duh, but that's not the issue. When you have radio signal coming off of a wire and bleeding into free space any and all frequencies could be impacted. So if you're willing to give up your emergency services (police, fire, ambulance, disaster recovery)...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15145190 Sun, 01 Jan 2006 11:23:24 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15142259 MysticGogeta : Im sorry but id rather have more compatition in broadband then haveing a radio frequency i never use]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15142259 Sat, 31 Dec 2005 20:36:45 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15121166 rf_engineer :
said by DaDogs See Profile :

said by shashinka See Profile :

This is being deployed in Texas, right?

The ARRL is not funded to worry about the whole spectrum, this is up to the FCC and those affected.
So the ARRL, ONCE concerned with wise spectrum use for ALL frequencies, has now whored itself to a BPL carrier...
I can't recall the ARRL ever being concerned for all frequencies, although maybe remotely shortwave broadcast since many hams are SWLs. Can you cite an example were the ARRL lobbied for non-ham spectrum in some official public way?

Many have said this before, but the one and only issue that ARRL and ham radio has with BPL is with interference to ham radio. If a BPL carrier can honestly fix that problem without smoke and mirrors, and not be continual thorn in our sides, hams have nothing to complain about (much to the dismay of trolls and ham bashers here). The NTIA documented the issues with aeronautical frequencies, and the FCC implemented some protection for them, but if it isn't sufficient, it's the fault of the NTIA and FCC and they'll have to answer for it. Commercial interests that will be affected need to spend their money to protect their interests, not that of ARRL members. Myself and others may argue that BPL on any frequency is a bad scene, but I'm not going to pay to convince an unresponsive, heavily politicized FCC to protect a for-profit business. The ARRL has made bad decisions in the past, but this isn't one of them.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15121166 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 21:54:33 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120558 moonpuppy : RC aircraft are usually regulated to 72MHz. RC vehicles (cars and boats) are 75MHz. There are other frequncies next to the CB band (27Mhz) and some frequencies at 49MHz (limited power.) HAMS can also use the 6 meter band for RC control. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120558 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 20:30:46 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120331 DaDogs :
said by RadioDoc See Profile :

No wonder you're always crashing. Does that thing run on Mountain Dew?
Naw, dat one runs on crack cocaine...]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120331 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 20:01:02 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120313 DaDogs :
said by shashinka See Profile :

This is being deployed in Texas, right?

The ARRL is not funded to worry about the whole spectrum, this is up to the FCC and those affected.
You DO realize that the FCC has been FSCKING up constantly over the past year, right?

You DO realize that the ARRL is viewed as a quasi-honorable organization concerned with wise and correct use of the spectrum, right?

What this tells me is that the ARRL are money whores like pretty much any other organization I've run across in my too many years.

So the ARRL, ONCE concerned with wise spectrum use for ALL frequencies, has now whored itself to a BPL carrier...

Im not impressed.
--
Ooh measuring dicks with a guy over 30 years your junior, and berating me because I haven't served, as if it actually matters? Good boy! -- said by "A true American Hero". Oh, ummm. Yeah, It actually does matter, by the way.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15120313 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 19:57:32 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119930 vpoko :
said by MysticGogeta See Profile :

Who cares get a cell phone or nextel if you want some walkie talkies its time to change
There's always somebody that says that every time the topic comes up. To me isn't the issue of what spectrum they're using, it's that BPL should be confined to the wire and not bleed into the open air. If it's bleeding, you can be sure it's going to bleed all over the place because of harmonic frequencies and the like. An unintentional emmiter capable of squelching parts of the radio spectrum is a alarming.

I don't, however, mean to muddle the issue: ARRL should only be responsible for looking out for their own frequencies.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119930 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:52:38 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119807 MysticGogeta : Who cares get a cell phone or nextel if you want some walkie talkies its time to change]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119807 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 18:31:49 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119612 W1RFI : Have you really thought that disappointment through? ARRL staff have agonized over it.

In the first place, with several million HomePlug modems deployed -- the modems used on HF by Current Technologies -- ARRL does not have a single report of harmful interference involving Amateur Radio. To ARRL's knowledge, there have been no reports about HomePlug modems filed with the FCC involving shortwave listening, even reports by amateurs. In Cincinatti, although some noise was observed by me on the shortwave bands, of 50,000 homes passed, there were no reports of harmful interfernce to Amateur Radio or shortwave broadcasting, even by the hams there.

The system deployed in Texas is almost certain to be the next generation of HomePlug devices. Under the FCC rules, it will have to have the ability to notch any spectrum as needed, so if there were to be interference reports by those other spectrum users, the manufacturer will have the ability to address them.

ARRL has standing to speak for Amateur Radio. The real disappointment is that the other users of the spectrum, groups like APCO and the international shortwave broadcasters, have not spoken much at all for themselves. In
the presence of their silence, ARRL cannot and should not try to speak outside its standing. If it were to do so, the BPL industry would pounce on that, claiming that these other radiocommunications users do not see an interference problem, but ARRL is making up one that doesn't exist.

They would then use that to try to completely discredit ARRL's legitimate concerns for interference in the ham bands.

The League has worked with these other entities and made its information available to them. All they would have to do to make good use of it is to do 10% of the work that ARRL has put into this effort, and to allow their speaking out to give standing to ARRL to be able to support them as they address their interference concerns.

They have not, and under the circumstances, unless your disappointment extends to being willing to lose credibility for Amateur Radio, ARRL must continue to work within its standing to speak for Amateur Radio.

Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15119612 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 17:57:45 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118514 rf_engineer :
said by sbrook See Profile :

The thing is that it doesn't MATTER what's in the 30-50 MHz spectrum. BPL will create a lot of "splatter", everytime it hits a transformer, ever cable joint etc.

It's a ridiculous technology.
I won't disagree that it's ridiculous technology, however I'd rather have this in 30 - 50 Mhz than plunked on the spectrum below 30 Mhz. Much of the communications in 30 to 50 Mhz is FM and local communications, often using repeaters and/or used in vehicles with electrically noisy engines to begin with. Receive signal levels are in general higher that what you work with on HF (1-30 Mhz). On HF, one often receives signals just above the noise floor, something most BPL proponents just don't understand.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118514 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 15:09:25 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118276 Steve :
said by sbrook See Profile :

It disappoints me that the ARRL has taken an "I'm alright Jack" attitude to this by saying it doesn't affect amateur frequencies, when in fact it is going to hurt LOTS of other parts of the spectrum.
The ARRL is essentially a trade association which is empowered to act in the interests of its members, and they should confine themselves to their proper constituency.

Steve
--
Stephen J. Friedl • Unix Wizard • Microsoft Security MVP • Tustin, California USA • my web site]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118276 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 14:34:20 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118192 shashinka : This is being deployed in Texas, right?

The ARRL is not funded to worry about the whole spectrum, this is up to the FCC and those affected.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118192 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 14:17:28 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118048 RadioDoc :
said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

said by RadioDoc See Profile :

Read the article: 30-50 MHz
I saw that wise guy. What I was asking was what services are affected? And that isn't in the article.
Get off your lazy butt and do some research on your own. There are hundreds of different services in that frequency range.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118048 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:52:26 EDT Re: Besides http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118011 Transmaster : The military is a big user of frequencies in the upper part of this frequency range. I wish they would not pollute the 6 meter region because it has some very interesting propagation characteristics. The 49 mhz area is one I have used when I was in the Army National Guard and we used to be able to talk from Camp Guernsey, Wyoming to Ft Carson, Colorado from our vehicles which is a range of just short of 300 miles. It is a very nice mobile frequency.
--
Low voltage Tech's are wimps, Real tech's use 45 pound filament transformers, plate voltages no less then 2400 volts with at least 10 amp's lighting 8877 triodes...BPL I'm coming to get you.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15118011 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:46:52 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117846 aSic : The American Red Cross uses 47.420Mhz as its primary freq.

My county Sheriffs Ofc uses 460Mhz as primary, but 46, 41, and 42Mhz as tactical channels.

Florida Dept of Corrections uses 45mhz.

Florida Dept of Transportation uses 45 and 47mhz.

Florida Highway Patrol still uses (although not near as much as they used to) 45mhz across the state.

And lets not forget about all the fast food joints. The menuboard->headset freq of 95% of the joints is below 40mhz.

Theres these and a crapload of other agencies that use sub50Mhz for their primary communication, not all of which have the benefit of a large body like the ARRL on their side.
--
Teamwork is a lot of people doing what I say.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117846 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 13:23:17 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117518 raIDERspeed : CHP is still on the VHF low band system]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117518 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:36:38 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117509 sbrook : The thing is that it doesn't MATTER what's in the 30-50 MHz spectrum. BPL will create a lot of "splatter", everytime it hits a transformer, ever cable joint etc.

It's a ridiculous technology.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117509 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:35:15 EDT Re: Besides http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117504 rf_engineer :
said by Fatal Vector See Profile :

There really isn't that much use of the 30-50 Mhz "Low band" any more. Most of the state police agencies that used it are long gone to trunked, million dollar Motorola garbage.

Of course, when they finally auction off the analog TV VHF spectrum and move public safety to 700 Mhz, all those million dollar Motorola systems will be so much scrap and the equipment will hit the surplus market. I can see the hams licking their chops now. Mobiles and HT's for a song, trunking systems on the cheap....Hams will finally get to use some of the UHF and microwave spectrum they have.
This is a totally anecdotal statistic (no link provided, standard disclaimers apply :-) ), but I know there's at least one antenna manufacturer that is still pumping out about 2000 low band VHF base station/repeater antennas a year, so there's still a lot of use. Like most things technological, trends are cyclic. You'll see low band VHF become sexy once again after the higher bands get too congested or the county $100M high tech system fails.

I don't see the FCC reallocating UHF or microwave spectrum to hams. Hams have plenty of UHF and microwave to work with now.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117504 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:34:29 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117468 rf_engineer :
said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

said by RadioDoc See Profile :

Read the article: 30-50 MHz
I saw that wise guy. What I was asking was what services are affected? And that isn't in the article.
Lower VHF TV channels, business two way radio, and in some areas low band VHF public safety. I say "in some areas" as a lot of public safety is now in high band VHF ( ~150 Mhz) and the 800/900 Mhz spectrum. You'll see low band used in more rural areas or in areas with less money or incentives (like frequency congestion) to move public safety to other bands.
]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117468 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:29:00 EDT Besides http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117459 Fatal Vector :
There really isn't that much use of the 30-50 Mhz "Low band" any more. Most of the state police agencies that used it are long gone to trunked, million dollar Motorola garbage.

Of course, when they finally auction off the analog TV VHF spectrum and move public safety to 700 Mhz, all those million dollar Motorola systems will be so much scrap and the equipment will hit the surplus market. I can see the hams licking their chops now. Mobiles and HT's for a song, trunking systems on the cheap....Hams will finally get to use some of the UHF and microwave spectrum they have.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117459 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:27:46 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117442 spurious :
Who uses 30 - 50 MHz? Many State and local Law enforcement agencies and highway maintenance agencies, not to mention a host of other public service agencies and industrial users.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117442 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:24:51 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117394 rf_engineer :
said by sbrook See Profile :

It disappoints me that the ARRL has taken an "I'm alright Jack" attitude to this by saying it doesn't affect amateur frequencies, when in fact it is going to hurt LOTS of other parts of the spectrum.
It has been the ARRL's stance from the beginning to strive for protection of amateur radio spectrum only. BPL interests would probably try to invalidate ARRL's issues with BPL and amateur radio spectrum if it started complaining about other services that it had no stake in. I tend to agree with them, though it's sad other services have basically done little to nothing to protect their spectrum.

As I mentioned two articles ago, Current has been very successful with the Cincinnati trial, with no unresolved interference issues. TXU did have an earlier trial with Amperion that had unresolved issues and was deactivated before the FCC could take action. I don't recall TXU ever fessing up to the interference, but their decision to go with Current says a lot.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117394 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:18:44 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117363 TKJunkMail :
said by RadioDoc See Profile :

Read the article: 30-50 MHz
I saw that wise guy. What I was asking was what services are affected? And that isn't in the article.
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117363 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:14:53 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117317 RadioDoc : No wonder you're always crashing. Does that thing run on Mountain Dew?
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117317 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:08:00 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117302 53059959 : I use 1337 mhz]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117302 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:04:55 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117281 RadioDoc : Those generally use 75 MHz.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117281 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 12:01:58 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117232 Mactron :
said by sbrook See Profile :

It disappoints me that the ARRL has taken an "I'm alright Jack" attitude to this by saying it doesn't affect amateur frequencies, when in fact it is going to hurt LOTS of other parts of the spectrum.
Ah but it's NIMBY. :D The businesses, federal, state, and local governments, law enforcement agencies, and various industrial radio services can take on the BPL Fan Boys now. ;)
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117232 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:51:47 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117222 53059959 : lol, I can see someone flying one of those remote control planes-then it goes too close to power lines and drops out of the sky]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117222 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:50:08 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117215 sporkme :
said by TKJunkMail See Profile :

And what activities are going to be impacted by Current's system?
It's only 3MHz away from CB radio. :)

And please, please think about the children and their 49MHz remote controlled toys.
--
enjoy zesty ranch man-flavored baby tacos responsibly]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117215 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:48:57 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117211 RadioDoc : Read the article: 30-50 MHz
--
Toolmaster of La Grange.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117211 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:47:40 EDT Re: Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117203 TKJunkMail :
said by sbrook See Profile :

It disappoints me that the ARRL has taken an "I'm alright Jack" attitude to this by saying it doesn't affect amateur frequencies, when in fact it is going to hurt LOTS of other parts of the spectrum.
And what activities are going to be impacted by Current's system?
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117203 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:46:08 EDT Disappointing http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117172 sbrook : It disappoints me that the ARRL has taken an "I'm alright Jack" attitude to this by saying it doesn't affect amateur frequencies, when in fact it is going to hurt LOTS of other parts of the spectrum.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,15117172 Wed, 28 Dec 2005 11:40:59 EDT