how-to block ads
|
Uniqs:
618 |
Share Topic
 |
 |
|
|
| | To the Ham radio backers. Try getting over it. Even assuming that the interference issue is real--which I've seen no solid evidence of--BPL technology is simply more valuable than Ham radio.
Sorry, but sooner or later old technologies die out, and you'll no longer be able to drive your horse and buggy on the interstate highway. If your argument is "This is the way it was before," then I'd have to point out that progress doesn't work that way. Show me a real, tangible benefit that Ham radio provides to modern society, on the level of broadband internet.
Yes, BPL may not be practical, yet. But this is first generation technology, and will certainly never be practical if it gets killed for the dubious benefit of a technology that the internet itself rendered largely obsolete years ago. | |
|   koitsuPremium,MVM
join:2002-07-16
Mountain View, CA
kudos:14 | Re: To the Ham radio backers. Sorry, I consider HAM much more benefitial than BPL.
I am also an advocate of "out with the old, in with the new" mentality -- old technologies should be deprecated and eventually phased out. So don't think for a moment that I'm one of those anti-BPL people.
I simply refuse to accept technologies that emit so much interference that they destroy something we rely on heavily, including for emergency situations.
HAM needs to stay, and BPL needs to go -- or better yet, be re-invented with proper shielding. Oh wait, no can do, since that'd require re-running power lines and yadda yadda... Guess that pretty much sums it up then. 
--
Making life hard for others since 1977. In memory of 2005... | |
| | | Example hurricane Dennis and affected areas.
Power is expected to be out a few weeks.Oh cell phones that's right.IF the towers are still standing.Until all communications are restored.Major relief efforts from the beginning will be conducted by Ham's.Like it or not.There's a working example.And no I do not own ham radio equipment.It's about time i did. | |
| | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. Hams use electricity too. Granted, there are models that run on batteries, but there are phones that use satellites.
For every reason you come up with for Hams, someone can come up with just as good a reason to get rid of them. | |
| | | N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | Re: To the Ham radio backers. Interesting...it used to be the BPL proponents claim that there was no interference then we sidestepped to claims of having somehow magically eliminated the interference and now we've degenerated to making half-baked excuses for "getting rid of" those who would be affected by the interference. Sad, very sad. | |
| | | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. You are just whining because you have sunk so much money into your hobby & it is going to be taken away from you. I couldn’t care less if we have HAMS or not. I live where I can get broadband, so this is not going to affect me.
If you really want to whine, you should focus your attention towards the Supreme Court. Their recent ruling on the power of eminent domain will probably doom you Hammys. If enough tests are deemed successes, the FCC will take steps to re-aquire the bandwidth from you, if you havent already abandoned it from the interference you say will result. | |
| | | | | N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | Re: To the Ham radio backers. Wrong. As a USER of the HF spectrum (as opposed to an incidental polluter) I have a better appreciation of the benefit this unique resource provides to the community as a whole. While the amateur frequency allocations are of direct import to me, I also embrace the big picture which includes the other ~90% of the spectrum affected by HF BPL and the services that would be affected and which you so readily dismiss in your greed for bandwidth at any price. | |
| | | | | | | | Answer the question that IMA asked you. How do you justify the idea of Ham radio as an emergency communication conduit when it needs electricity to run? In that respect, cell phones are more reliable, since they're battery powered.
Exactly what "benefits" does the "unique resource" of Ham radio provide? List them, please. | |
| | | | | | | N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | Re: Answer the question that IMA asked you. said by FightingBlue:
How do you justify the idea of Ham radio as an emergency communication conduit when it needs electricity to run? In that respect, cell phones are more reliable, since they're battery powered.
Exactly what "benefits" does the "unique resource" of Ham radio provide? List them, please.
Let me see...can you say "G e n e r a t o r" ? Believe it or not, these convenient devices are readily available at your local hardware store, some of them no bigger than a small suitcase, and quiet too! Many hams have them and go to great lengths to prepare to use their equipment during times of mains power outage - to suppose that an entity that has provided communications facilities time and again during natural and man-made disasters would have overlooked this most obvious of issues defies belief!
My comments were in reference to the nature of the HF spectrum AS A WHOLE and its unique ability to support low-infrastructure global communication. Let me explain this apparently baffling concept to you: Someone with a radio, an antenna and, yes, electricty, can communicate with someone else, potentially thousands of miles away with similar equipment - no wires, no satellites, NO OTHER INFRASTRUCTURE. The HF spectrum is the ONLY part of the radio spectrum that supports this. It occurs to me that this resource just might be worth protecting from things that might render it unusable such as HF BPL. | |
| | | | | | | | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO | Re: Answer the question that IMA asked you. Yes and fightingblue don't say "well if the power is out the BPL interference is gone" either. Because of this nature of the HF spectrum, the interference from a distant BPL site will still be loud and clear. We hams say "if you can't hear em, you can't work em" well this saying is very true. If a disaster happens in your area that takes the power and BPL out, you still can't hear the distant stations you are trying to get through to because of other BPL sites radiating their garbage signals and covering up all the usually weak signals you are trying to communicate with to begin with. The ionospheric properties in the HF bands are constantly varying with frequency, time of day, time of season, time of sunspot cycle among many other factors, and signals including BPL will be heard anywhere from a few miles to thousands of miles away from the source. This is another totally overlooked fact that any of the pro-BPL folks fail to mention if they even know about at all. There's alot more to the HF spectrum than you know about so shut up and do some research. BPL is a BAD idea period! | |
|
| Reviews:
 ·Charter
| You know the chance of a cell tower going out?? Cell towers are meant to take hurricane strength winds, direct lightning hits, tornado's, etc. Heck one here in St.Louis was hit by a small plane and worked fine after that. All cell towers have backup gens for electric anyways.
Point is this: You don't need HAM radio at ALL in developed countries. It has its place in other places but not in the US, to many other backups to void it out.
Heck even major goverment use sat phones for emergency needs anyways, pretty much puts HAM out of the picture. | |
| | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. said by markopoleo:Point is this: You don't need HAM radio at ALL in developed countries. It has its place in other places but not in the US, to many other backups to void it out. The death of Ham will not happen and you know it
la la la
I'm buying a Ham right now  | |
| | | | | said by markopoleo:You know the chance of a cell tower going out?? Cell towers are meant to take hurricane strength winds, direct lightning hits, tornado's, etc. Heck one here in St.Louis was hit by a small plane and worked fine after that. All cell towers have backup gens for electric anyways.
Does no good when the rest of the infrastructure is damaged plus the call volume will be SEVERLY reduced. said by markopoleo:Point is this: You don't need HAM radio at ALL in developed countries. It has its place in other places but not in the US, to many other backups to void it out.
Yes, you do since the underdeveloped countries need to talk to a developed country that has communications in place to relay the information needed. said by markopoleo:Heck even major government use sat phones for emergency needs anyways, pretty much puts HAM out of the picture. Not in all cases. Again, cost is a real issue along with call volume. Plus, sat phones have no broadcast capability while radios do. Now go find that proof where Europe uses DC power instead of AC like the US and the rest of the world. | |
| | | | | said by markopoleo:You know the chance of a cell tower going out?? Cell towers are meant to take hurricane strength winds, direct lightning hits, tornado's, etc. Heck one here in St.Louis was hit by a small plane and worked fine after that. All cell towers have backup gens for electric anyways. LOL
Most cell sites run on telco facilities for backhaul these days. A Yugo can take down a cellsite by hitting the right pole. And once again you confuse infrastructureless worldwide wireless communications with what cellphones and satellites provide. | |
| | | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. "Infrastructureless" except for little requirements like electricity, plus the problems with 1) almost no one using it, and 2) being able to successfully communicate with who you intended to.
Out of curiousity, do you think that a Yugo is going to hit a LEO comm satellite? True or false--satellite phones are more common than Ham radio equipment; they provide for targeted communications rather than blindly hoping someone hears you; they're more autonomous because they're small, mobile, and battery powered; and they don't require a license and special knowledge to use.
Here's an idea: if you want to exchange banal banter with unknown people represented by cryptic combinations of letters and numbers, use a chat room. | |
|
| |  FLECOMBay Networks FreakPremium
join:2003-03-03
Miami, FL
 ·AT&T DSL Service
| said by markopoleo:You know the chance of a cell tower going out?? Cell towers are meant to take hurricane strength winds, direct lightning hits, tornado's, etc. Heck one here in St.Louis was hit by a small plane and worked fine after that. All cell towers have backup gens for electric anyways. Point is this: You don't need HAM radio at ALL in developed countries. It has its place in other places but not in the US, to many other backups to void it out. Heck even major goverment use sat phones for emergency needs anyways, pretty much puts HAM out of the picture. no, trust me, towers go down... last year during the hurricanes in florida cellular coverage was pretty much nil... after hurricane andrew here there were very few radio towers left standing to even think of putting anything on... even the 2000 ft ch6 tower broke about 100ft up from the base and was completely demolished... they go down
--
BellSouth sucks | |
| | | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. said by "FLECOM":
no, trust me, towers go down... last year during the hurricanes in florida cellular coverage was pretty much nil... after hurricane andrew here there were very few radio towers left standing to even think of putting anything on... even the 2000 ft ch6 tower broke about 100ft up from the base and was completely demolished... they go down
Yep, and considering that in developed and populated areas, they often aren't willing, or even able, to erect their own cell towers, but instead attach various cell repeater antenna gear onto existing physical infrastructure - the same sort of infrastructure that can also be damaged in natural disasters.
I can't believe how many ignorant people (not you!) are posting in this thread. They want their "BPL broadband" - no matter what the cost, without realizing how poorly it will likely perform in the end, compared to other then-competitive offerings, and at what cost.
But sadly, the hype around BPL is a *perfect* feeding-ground for snake-oil salesmen, that will pitch the possibility of something that is given the appearance of being cheap and ubiquitous, when in fact the true technical reality is so far removed from that. The problem is if they can convince PHB-type regulators / legislators / policy-makers that such a "vision" is a good idea, they might well go ahead and feel like tearing down existing infrastructure in the HF spectrum to make way. Eventually, all that route will lead to, is people getting burned on all sides - the investors in this failed technology, the anticipatory customers of it, and the prior users of that spectrum that were walked all over by the mob rushing to see the snake-oil salesman promising them impossible miracles. The only people set to make out from this are the liars promoting this, knowing that "a fool and his money are soon parted". | |
|
| | KB2PSM
join:2002-08-06
Long Beach, NY | Another troll message from markopoleo- the most responded to flag-waver of BPL that never presents hard evidence or will ever respond to the continued clarifications and facts given to him.
Anyway...
Only speaking for myself-
When Flight 800 went down, I was asked to respond because the cell towers in the disaster recovery site became so overwhelmed that emergency personnel could not reliably use them. Also, given the spread of responders, from the FBI, FAA, NYPD teams, NYFD teams, local and county fire/police, Red Cross, etc...ALL WITH WORKING RADIOS...there were no means of agency to agency communications. Trained Emergency Communicators were needed.
Perhaps you may remember 9/11...here in the NYC area, the effects remain indelible. Well, MANY cell systems were offline and nearly all cell phones were paperweights. The few cell sites that worked were so overwhelmed by family, friends and responders trying to place calls, that emergency and logistical communications could not be maintained. The Mayor's Office of Emergency Management had a separate radio command center in the "War Room" for Amateur Radio communications. It seems as if one of the largest and busiest cities in the world felt that the trained emergency communication provided by hams was important enough to grant the ONLY civilians with access to this OEM command center. Unfortunately, even this command center went down with the 9/11 attacks.
In the minutes, hours and weeks following 9/11, many, many thousands of hours of communications were provided by hundreds of (credentialed) ham radio volunteers. While folks were streaming out of Ground Zero and the Hot Zone, licensed and trained operators such as myself were asked, by Federal activation, to head in. I for one, given my experience was sent TO ground zero to the command center there, working in conjunction and as needed by served agencies including the FBI, CIA, Armed Forces, and several other major agencies. In order to get to my post, special access needed to be cleared and I was escorted by US military carrying automatic weapons. I didn't just show up to "play radio" with other Amateur Radio operators. I was asked and given the clearance to be there.
My activation for severe weather events are also other examples. In the capacity of an emergency communicator I have been required and have been certified by FEMA for Disaster Readiness. In addition, I am Red Cross certified for Disaster Assessment and have the training to operate a Red Cross Shelter. I am also certified by the National Weather Service to monitor and mitigate severe weather conditions. So, basically I am skilled and train for/with first responders and federal agencies- all in the name of public service, local and national emergencies.
How many of you, not in public or emergency service would have been given clearance to be at Ground Zero or participate in terrorist drills with the Office of Emergency Management? I personally know many other Amateur Radio operators that are equally or better skilled than I am. All of this is volunteer work and all related to my skills as an Amateur Radio Operator.
It seems as if you are a volunteer, such as in Ham Radio, some liken you to a silly hobbyist akin to a sea shell collector. That is plain ignorant. I hope that you don't belittle your local volunteer ambulance or fire departments because they volunteer their time and hone their skills and you do not expect that your house will ever catch fire or a loved one will not becomke seriously ill. Just because you or your community may not be directly hit/affected by a terrorist attack, major blackout, severe weather condition, does not mean that the services required/utilized in the affected areas are as a whole less important or valuable.
I mentioned my specific recent experiences because they are not hypothetical or hyperbole. You should also appreciate that I am not unique. And for the crotchety out there, my intention is not to pat myself on the back. I merely offer concrete examples of the type of volunteerism and skills recognized by government and public service agencies. I don't do this simply for me, but for my community and my country. If any of you would like to volunteer, but are not interested in Amateur Radio, then at least check into Volunteer America's website and get involved. If you are comfortable in doing nothing different, at least have respect for those of us who, when called upon, dedicate our time, money and resources for the public good.
markopoleo and his ilk wish to maintain a myopic view of the assets and benefits of this licensed pool of trained communicators. Because for him, 9/11 was most likely the pictures he saw on TV, he can (continue as he has many times in the past) ignore any redeeming value of Amateur Radio.
Finally, something else some of you just cannot grasp, so again it bears repeating-
Amateur Radio operators are NOT (yes, I typed NOT!) against broadband or the internet. They are not against technologies. They are specifically against the RF pollution that is attributed to ONE single form of broadband. They are concerned about sending broadband signals across great expanses of unshielded power lines. Hams are specifically concerned about BPL. Given the myriad technologies for broadband distribution, there are so many better choices. Obviously hams have a personal interest in thwarting BPL, but the concerns reach beyond the 10% of the radio spectrum that is used by Hams. Given the technical acuity of hams, they understand the problems which may be above the understanding or interests of others.
Because some folks do not understand radio wave propagation, some of the Laws of Physics or who (beyond us silly, useless Amateur Radio Operators) may use/rely on the frequencies between 2 through 80 Megahertz does not mean that they should automatically trample on the valid concerns.
I hope, maybe I will even pray that you all get the super high speed, next to free internet access that will reach every tree house in the most wayward of forests, but that does not mean that BPL should be blindly embraced.
And for the silly comment about the Supreme Court...I am more than concerned about that issue as well. It seems that for some, their sad argument is to trash the BPL concern as wasteful because there are other pressing matters. I for one can walk and chew gum at the same time. Likewise, I have much more faith than some that others are capable of addressing concerns on multiple fronts.
said by markopoleo:You know the chance of a cell tower going out?? Cell towers are meant to take hurricane strength winds, direct lightning hits, tornado's, etc. Heck one here in St.Louis was hit by a small plane and worked fine after that. All cell towers have backup gens for electric anyways. Point is this: You don't need HAM radio at ALL in developed countries. It has its place in other places but not in the US, to many other backups to void it out. Heck even major goverment use sat phones for emergency needs anyways, pretty much puts HAM out of the picture. | |
|
| | said by FightingBlue:
Try getting over it. Even assuming that the interference issue is real--which I've seen no solid evidence of--BPL technology is simply more valuable than Ham radio. Even the FCC acknowledges there is interference in their rule making by banning BPL in certain areas. There is proof and it has been shown here before.
said by FightingBlue:
Sorry, but sooner or later old technologies die out, and you'll no longer be able to drive your horse and buggy on the interstate highway. If your argument is "This is the way it was before," then I'd have to point out that progress doesn't work that way. Show me a real, tangible benefit that Ham radio provides to modern society, on the level of broadband internet. BPL is old tech. It was tried in Europe and Asia before here and failed already. Most systems were shut down due to interference and other issues.
As for Ham radio being a benefit, do a search, I have presented article after article on the benefits.
said by FightingBlue:
Yes, BPL may not be practical, yet. But this is first generation technology, and will certainly never be practical if it gets killed for the dubious benefit of a technology that the internet itself rendered largely obsolete years ago.
Again, this is not first gen tech. This is beyond that. It is crap shined up and presented on a silver platter. | |
| | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. MoonPuppy why dont you goto Potomac Maryland and find some interference complaints from that trial. I dont believe there are any. And I personally installed two hams in that network. Its only 20 miles away EC. | |
| | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. There isn't any because they notched the HAM bands.
»www.remote.arrl.org/announce/reg···it-e.pdf
Though some was measured, it is below allowable Part 15 rules.
But, if you read the last line of the above report, you would have seen this:
quote:
Since the amateur radio are notched, the interference is lower there than outside the notched frequency bands. The BPL interference observed in testing outside the notches could be troublesome for reception of international shortwave broadcasting and other HF signals.
Translation:
There is interference and we are masking it right now. You can only notch so much.
However, this is going to cause a problem. Maryland State Police still use frequencies in the 39Mhz area which is affected by BPL. Hope those are notched out. Hopefully, they won't also affect military communications which could be close by too. | |
|
| | said by FightingBlue:
Try getting over it. Even assuming that the interference issue is real--which I've seen no solid evidence of--BPL technology is simply more valuable than Ham radio. You won't find evidence unless you bother to look. A good place to start is the ARRL pages on the topic. The video and audio recordings found here are particularly informative, since they document the interference generated by several of the "successful" BPL trials, such as Manassas VA and Briarcliff Manor NY.
Sorry, but sooner or later old technologies die out, and you'll no longer be able to drive your horse and buggy on the interstate highway. If your argument is "This is the way it was before," then I'd have to point out that progress doesn't work that way. Show me a real, tangible benefit that Ham radio provides to modern society, on the level of broadband internet. Did the Emergency Services operations of the counties in the paths of Cindy and Dennis activate their local Internet users, or did they call the Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES)?
Yes, BPL may not be practical, yet. But this is first generation technology, and will certainly never be practical if it gets killed for the dubious benefit of a technology that the internet itself rendered largely obsolete years ago.
By the time BPL systems "notch" all the HF/VHF frequencies in use not only by amateur radio, but military, aeronautical, commercial, maritime, and broadcast users, they'll be lucky to be able to provide even 200kbps service. Better the investment be spent developing WiMax and similar technologies for serving rural areas.
KQ3T | |
| | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. quote:
You won't find evidence unless you bother to look. A good place to start is the ARRL pages on the topic. The video and audio recordings found here are particularly informative, since they document the interference generated by several of the "successful" BPL trials, such as Manassas VA and Briarcliff Manor NY.
So let's see, your recommendation for unbiased evidence is the ARRL's propaganda site? No offense intended, but their information is anything but unbiased--to hear them tell it, amateur radio singlehandedly saved the entire Gulf coast from Hurricane Dennis by telling the NHC where the storm was going to go.
I also notice that they're running their tenth annual fundraiser to bring in cash for the "Spectrum Defense Fund."
Of course, an organization would NEVER overhype a threat to bring in monetary donations.
quote:
Did the Emergency Services operations of the counties in the paths of Cindy and Dennis activate their local Internet users, or did they call the Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES)?
I don't know, since I'm not dumb enough to live in Mother Nature's weapons testing corridor. But I am willing to bet that they relied far more heavily on long-range mobile radios and cell phones than they ever did on Hams.
quote:
By the time BPL systems "notch" all the HF/VHF frequencies in use not only by amateur radio, but military, aeronautical, commercial, maritime, and broadcast users, they'll be lucky to be able to provide even 200kbps service. Better the investment be spent developing WiMax and similar technologies for serving rural areas.
I'm all for developing WiMax. In fact, I would greatly prefer a wireless solution be available. But it may not work out the way it's claimed to, and even if it does there are still going to be areas that don't get covered. We have every reason to continue developing BPL, in the hopes that one day it will shake the current limitations. My goal is simple: the most connectivity for the most people. Ham doesn't do that.
And for the record, to the people who aren't spoiled by 3, 4, 5 megabit promises by DSL and cable providers, 200 Kbits is a lot. | |
| | | | | Re: To the Ham radio backers. said by FightingBlue: quote:
You won't find evidence unless you bother to look. A good place to start is the ARRL pages on the topic. The video and audio recordings found here are particularly informative, since they document the interference generated by several of the "successful" BPL trials, such as Manassas VA and Briarcliff Manor NY.
So let's see, your recommendation for unbiased evidence is the ARRL's propaganda site? No offense intended, but their information is anything but unbiased--to hear them tell it, amateur radio singlehandedly saved the entire Gulf coast from Hurricane Dennis by telling the NHC where the storm was going to go. And your source are the BPL companies themselves who have a financial stake in saying everything is o.k. You expect them to be unbiased? 
said by FightingBlue:
I also notice that they're running their tenth annual fundraiser to bring in cash for the "Spectrum Defense Fund."
Of course, an organization would NEVER overhype a threat to bring in monetary donations. Uhh, the ARRL is non-profit as is all of Ham radio. Operators may not accept any monetary compensation as the entire service is voluntary.
said by FightingBlue: quote:
Did the Emergency Services operations of the counties in the paths of Cindy and Dennis activate their local Internet users, or did they call the Amateur Radio Emergency Services (ARES)?
I don't know, since I'm not dumb enough to live in Mother Nature's weapons testing corridor. But I am willing to bet that they relied far more heavily on long-range mobile radios and cell phones than they ever did on Hams. First off, NO AREA IN THE US IS IMMUNE FROM MOTHER NATURE. It may not be a hurricane. It could be a tornado, earthquake, blizzard, wild fire, or even a 9/11 terrorist attack. (Remember, NYC lost more than half of their communication infrastructure in the WTC complex.) And, YES, Hams were there. »september11.mrtmag.com/ar/radio_···_center/
Also, Hams have long range mobile communications too. Cell phones are still dependant on the towers being there, having power and a connection to the central office (providing the central office is still running themselves.)
said by FightingBlue: quote:
By the time BPL systems "notch" all the HF/VHF frequencies in use not only by amateur radio, but military, aeronautical, commercial, maritime, and broadcast users, they'll be lucky to be able to provide even 200kbps service. Better the investment be spent developing WiMax and similar technologies for serving rural areas.
I'm all for developing WiMax. In fact, I would greatly prefer a wireless solution be available. But it may not work out the way it's claimed to, and even if it does there are still going to be areas that don't get covered. We have every reason to continue developing BPL, in the hopes that one day it will shake the current limitations. My goal is simple: the most connectivity for the most people. Ham doesn't do that. If you want the most people covered, then why is BPL only going to dense areas? Simple reason is economics. No one wants to deploy into an area with limited returns on investment. The "everyone has powerlines so everyone should be able to get BPL" is like saying anyone with a phone line should be able to get DSL. A very simplistic, and naive, assumption that has already been proven wrong. Why are the bells going to fiber?
said by FightingBlue:
And for the record, to the people who aren't spoiled by 3, 4, 5 megabit promises by DSL and cable providers, 200 Kbits is a lot.
But for $30/month? There are not that many suckers to buy into that. | |
| | | |
| | ham radio is my life/hobby
tell me what tangible benefit that football/baseball provides to modern society ??? | |
| KB2PSM
join:2002-08-06
Long Beach, NY | Running away from the well-documented facts don't make them go away. If you are going to stand up as a well-versed proponent of BPL, you should come to the table with more than warm-and-fuzzy hopes and blinders on. There are MANY scientifically measured tests which back the interference concerns you so casually dismiss.
We certainly appreciate dialog and debate, but at least present your points with honesty. (Given the way you wrote it, it seems as if you see the evidence but find it incredible versus unavailable.) Look at www.goBPL.com and certainly look back at the previous threads on BPL.
If you still can't find any evidence, well- have fun with the warm-and-fuzzies!
Respectfully,
Rob
said by FightingBlue:
--which I've seen no solid evidence of--
| |
|
| |
|
