GOLFnSUN
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
| reply to RadioDoc
Re: Disappointing
said by RadioDoc  :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 |
|
spurious
join:2001-06-09
Florence, OR | 
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. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to GOLFnSUN
said by GOLFnSUN :said by RadioDoc :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.
|
|
sbrook
Premium,Mod
join:2001-12-14
H0H 0H0 | 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. |
|
raIDERspeed
join:2002-07-26
Soledad, CA | reply to spurious
CHP is still on the VHF low band system |
|
aSic
application specific
Premium
join:2001-05-17
Wakulla, FL
clubs:
| reply to spurious
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. |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
 ·AT&T Midwest
| reply to GOLFnSUN
said by GOLFnSUN :said by RadioDoc :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. |
|
shashinka
join:2000-09-16
West Boylston, MA | reply to aSic
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. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to sbrook
said by 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. 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. |
|
DaDogs
Semper Vigilantis
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA
| reply to shashinka
said by 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. 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. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by DaDogs :said by 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. 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. |
|
DaDogs
Semper Vigilantis
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA | reply to 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. |
|
