Nice in http://www.dslreports.com/forum/r20740670 en Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:54:13 EDT Thu, 03 Dec 2009 02:54:13 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20761966 Surfinusa : Like I said before previous. I like Ham I and several others participate in Ham. I also however like BPL or at least the concept.


It would appear most of the time the forums are littered with arguments of people taking offense to someone who doesn't like Ham or BPL and it turns ugly.

Why play into there line of reasoning.
Thinking it will mislead the masses? I think not.
To many Ham radio operators out there.

As far as the BPL it is off to a rough start.

Giving in to Trolls who like to bash Ham or BPL is pointless.

That was the essence of my original post, plain put I can care less what others think and would like to see less bashing and arguing about what BPL does to Hams or bashing Hams calling them useless.

It is a shame that some BBR Members feel they have to bash others to get there point across.

This is not worth starting a Flame war over.

BBR doesn't need Trolls or fan boys ripping it up in here.

And if they do the best thing I have learned is to defuse the situation. ( Walk away / Ignore )]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20761966 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 23:44:32 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20760575 rf_engineer :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Your right take it with a grain of salt.

Personally I can care less what Hams want or BPL users want.

Trust me I can are less.
Then why are you here and why should anyone care about your worthless opinions?
Not sure what your aim or trying to accomplish other than Trolling, stirring up trouble.
I'll admit my post was badly worded and uncharacteristically troll-like. My apologies. My intent was that you don't seem to care about BPL, amateur radio, the interference issue or communications in general, so it's a bit pointless to post indifferent opinions, hence not much value to them. It's sort of like me posting in the gamer forums when I have no interest in that realm. When you characterize the debate as crying over spilled milk, it's apparent that you don't have an interest in the issues at hand.

Many of us have been following the BPL interference issue since 2003. Several of the problems have been resolved and in the remaining deployments, amateur radio and BPL have coexisted. The jury was still out on whether they could coexist in the mass geographical and high bandwidth deployments that BPL companies originally envisioned. However, Internet access BPL is essentially dying due to competition and lack of carrier interest, so I think the question will never be answered and many of the debates here are pointless. However if someone makes erroneous claims that amateur radio is useless or has no value in emergency communications, or the several other often-repeated wrong tidbits of so-called information, expect people like me to rebut.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20760575 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 18:48:56 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20759425 Surfinusa :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Your right take it with a grain of salt.

Personally I can care less what Hams want or BPL users want.

Trust me I can are less.
Then why are you here and why should anyone care about your worthless opinions?
About to ask you the same thing.

I am tired of hearing about people crying over spilled milk.

You say my worthless opinions? I guess it depends on what you call worthless. I am not giving my opinion. I express how I feel.

Like I said I can care less about the HAM/BPL arguments and would love to see them co-exist and stop the bickering.

And I would love it for members to be a little more respectful to other members ( such as yourself).

Learn some manners when posting here. It is not taken to kindly calling a Members post worthless. Take a lesson from this.

You don't have to agree with a post.

If the post was worthless you wouldn't have bothered replying or getting involved.

Not sure what your aim or trying to accomplish other than Trolling, stirring up trouble. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20759425 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 15:17:35 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20757845 rf_engineer :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Your right take it with a grain of salt.

Personally I can care less what Hams want or BPL users want.

Trust me I can are less.
Then why are you here and why should anyone care about your worthless opinions?]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20757845 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 10:30:36 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20756702 Surfinusa : Your right take it with a grain of salt.

Personally I can care less what Hams want or BPL users want.

It would be nice to see people stop acting like there arm is being removed slowly. Or there liberties are being taken away.

All I hear is pouting/crying, and the you don't understand what this does to us.

They are right I don't understand and don't care.

I laugh and the next time I need someone with a Ham radios help I would rather wait for the ambulance to come or drive myself.

And for those who say what if those services are not available and I can't get help and need a Ham radio operator.

I say great if they want to help me. But otherwise I won't hold my breath.

I like Ham radios I like using them. But I am not going to cry over it if someone interferes I can just change channels or turn it off and make a phone call. (wow) that's a new concept. Save the Radio for when its a real emergency.

LOL I get a kick out of BPL and Hams crying about this and that.

Trust me I can are less.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20756702 Tue, 08 Jul 2008 00:30:32 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755759 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

Well, of course you do. Who can argue with the hobbyist's sense of self-importance and super-human powers. :)
No super-human power required; it doesn't matter if you're the director of FEMA, the President of the US, or the Pope...your words tell what you are.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755759 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 20:41:20 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755202 amigo_boy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

You're a guy with a web browser and a blog login.
Problem number one. You don't know what I am.
Bzzzzzt. I do.
Well, of course you do. Who can argue with the hobbyist's sense of self-importance and super-human powers. :)

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755202 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:56:12 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755145 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

You're a guy with a web browser and a blog login.
Problem number one. You don't know what I am.
Bzzzzzt. I do.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755145 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:45:43 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755107 amigo_boy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

You're a guy with a web browser and a blog login.
Problem number one. You don't know what I am.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755107 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:37:29 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755091 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Again, I'm at a loss why you and others are so against amateur radio and using a self-trained group of citizens equipping and training themselves at little to no expense to the general public to provide a public service. It would seem like a win-win situation,
I'm not against it. Just not sold on the win-win aspect. Maybe there should be more responsibility expected for the use of public airwaves. Maybe mandatory participation in emergency or other civil uses. Maybe it's outlived its usefulness and folks can get by with FRS and CBRS.
There's plenty of responsibility there, read Title 47 Part 97.1. As far as getting by with FRS and "CBRS", it's obvious you don't know what you're talking about.

If you want more responsibility, feel free to petition the FCC. You're going to need some more worthy material than you've posted here.

I'm just not sold on the hobbyist (and it is a hobby, nothing denigrating about that term) argument that the way it is right now is perfect.
That's fine. We're not sold on your "not every ham does emergency communications" argument, the "2m and 70 cm can replace HF", your "relay net" solution, the "sat phone" solution or the several other items you repetitively post here. We're communications hobbyists who are licensed, provide public service, and explore new communications methods and techniques. Many of us are also communications professionals during the day. You're a guy with a web browser and a blog login.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20755091 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 18:34:33 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754886 amigo_boy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Again, I'm at a loss why you and others are so against amateur radio and using a self-trained group of citizens equipping and training themselves at little to no expense to the general public to provide a public service. It would seem like a win-win situation,
I'm not against it. Just not sold on the win-win aspect. Maybe there should be more responsibility expected for the use of public airwaves. Maybe mandatory participation in emergency or other civil uses. Maybe it's outlived its usefulness and folks can get by with FRS and CBRS.

I'm just not sold on the hobbyist (and it is a hobby, nothing denigrating about that term) argument that the way it is right now is perfect.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754886 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:53:31 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754846 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

No misdirection. HF can be used for regional communications as well and could be of value in a northwest flood or Katrina situation. Read up on NVIS antennas and learn about 80 and 40 meters.
Could be of more value. So could additional bandwidth.
By additional bandwidth, you mean BPL? For emergency communications?

Just saying there's nothing sacred about hobby use of HF in emergencies. (But, they may derive a coattail effect from government use, or international treaty.
How can it be "hobby use" if it's passing traffic during an emergency situation? (BTW, I get your tactic of putting "hobby" in front of terms. Nice way to antagonize.)

But, then there's no reason to use public service as PR against interference.).
It's not PR against interference, it's illustrating value of the spectrum and the amateur service.

Again, I'm at a loss why you and others are so against amateur radio and using a self-trained group of citizens equipping and training themselves at little to no expense to the general public to provide a public service. It would seem like a win-win situation, but instead you seem bent on dismantling this with a system that costs money and depends on infrastructure prone to capacity issues and failure. And why risk an infrastructure-free communications system for a technically challenged broadband solution that has been a marketing and business failure?

But of course, you're just here to protect unsuspecting people from being taken advantage of by hobbyists :-)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754846 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:45:04 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754794 moonpuppy :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

It shouldn't take that many sat phones. Remember, the bulk of communications would be from radio hobbyists forming relay nets on 2 meter and 70cm back to areas where traditional communication exists. During Katrina, that would have been Baton Rouge?

It would also be possible to have a couple sets of phones and same-day fedex them to the appropriate people for use in the disaster area. Something like that could have occurred in advance of Katrina.

Mark
Pray tell, how do you FedEx something to someone is a disaster area? Please explain that one.

You see how prepared the city of New Orleans and the state of Louisiana was prepared. Buses underwater, the stadium in a state of chaos, looters all over the place, etc.

As for not needing that many, you would need at least 1 per jurisdiction. And with many of the New Orleans Police Department either running away or looting the stores, i can imagine those sat phones gone before the first call is made. You also forgot to add the cost for calls since the government would have to pay for those too.

Baton Rogue was also pretty much devastated. I knew 3 co-workers who had to go down there just to get the place somewhat operational. I was scheduled to go down 2 days after them but the damage was so great, they got up what they could and left. There was still no power in the area. Cell phones did not work even after a week.

Your fantasies have barely any basis in fact.

Try again.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754794 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 17:33:23 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754411 amigo_boy :
said by moonpuppy See Profile :

He might but I doubt he wants the massive increases that come with what he is proposing. ;)
It shouldn't take that many sat phones. Remember, the bulk of communications would be from radio hobbyists forming relay nets on 2 meter and 70cm back to areas where traditional communication exists. During Katrina, that would have been Baton Rouge?

It would also be possible to have a couple sets of phones and same-day fedex them to the appropriate people for use in the disaster area. Something like that could have occurred in advance of Katrina.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754411 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:13:09 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754348 moonpuppy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

Does he pay taxes? :-)
He might but I doubt he wants the massive increases that come with what he is proposing. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754348 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 16:02:42 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754334 rf_engineer :
said by moonpuppy See Profile :

said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Katrina affected a very large area where 2m communications (the band with more range than 70cm) would not have been practical or feasible.
Feasible under *your* terms. ;) Terms that include *not* requiring everyone everyone to participate by forming relay nets. Terms that exclude the use of sat phones.

Sure, it would be different. Sure, it would expect more from those who slap themselves on their backs (because a handful volunteered during an emergency). Different isn't necessarily bad. Unless it goes against *your* vested interests.

Mark
Sat phones are an extra cost that no one wants to bear (not even the government.)
Does he pay taxes? :-)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754334 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:58:48 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754176 amigo_boy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

No misdirection. HF can be used for regional communications as well and could be of value in a northwest flood or Katrina situation. Read up on NVIS antennas and learn about 80 and 40 meters.
Could be of more value. So could additional bandwidth. It's just a matter of where the line is drawn. 2 meter and greater hobbyist participation (augmented by sat phones owned by the Natl. Guard and/or Red Cross) could be be where the line is drawn.

Just saying there's nothing sacred about hobby use of HF in emergencies. (But, they may derive a coattail effect from government use, or international treaty. But, then there's no reason to use public service as PR against interference.).

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754176 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:32:15 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754029 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

how 2 meters and 70 centimeters could take the place of HF spectrum, considering neither band can travel around the world like HF. Still no answer.
Misdirection. Global communications weren't necessary for the Northwest floods, or Katrina. Just local communication back outside the disaster area where mainstream communications are available.
No misdirection. HF can be used for regional communications as well and could be of value in a northwest flood or Katrina situation. Read up on NVIS antennas and learn about 80 and 40 meters.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20754029 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 15:06:40 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753924 moonpuppy :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Katrina affected a very large area where 2m communications (the band with more range than 70cm) would not have been practical or feasible.
Feasible under *your* terms. ;) Terms that include *not* requiring everyone everyone to participate by forming relay nets. Terms that exclude the use of sat phones.

Sure, it would be different. Sure, it would expect more from those who slap themselves on their backs (because a handful volunteered during an emergency). Different isn't necessarily bad. Unless it goes against *your* vested interests.

Mark
Sat phones are an extra cost that no one wants to bear (not even the government.)

Your lack of communications knowledge is very evident in your posts. Please come back with a more logical argument. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753924 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 14:46:43 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753642 amigo_boy :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Would be nice if HAM and BPL could co-exist.

Apparently not with current technologies.
It's been said that BPL can notch around hobby frequencies. Even that ARRL has supported such an implementation.

See »Catch up on the truth

You just don't hear that kind of balance because most hobbyists have a "circle the wagons" strategy. "If you give a little, they'll take more." It's understandable. You get that from any special interest group. That's why you have to take things with a grain of salt.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753642 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:56:24 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753564 Surfinusa :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

The "no power, no interference" claim was debunked three or four years ago; it's a rather simplistic and severely flawed argument. Perhaps we should also dismantle our military during peacetime? No war, no military needed, eh?

The same marketing and legal drones who were spewing BPL propaganda with similar simple-minded answers back in 2003 and 2004 have moved on to other industries with their hockey-stick growth charts. But feel free to repeat the same material again...we all need a good laugh.
Dismantle the military great thinking.

Now if every country would do that.

Would be nice if HAM and BPL could co-exist.

Apparently not with current technologies.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753564 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:43:03 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753549 amigo_boy :
said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Katrina affected a very large area where 2m communications (the band with more range than 70cm) would not have been practical or feasible.
Feasible under *your* terms. ;) Terms that include *not* requiring everyone everyone to participate by forming relay nets. Terms that exclude the use of sat phones.

Sure, it would be different. Sure, it would expect more from those who slap themselves on their backs (because a handful volunteered during an emergency). Different isn't necessarily bad. Unless it goes against *your* vested interests.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753549 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:40:19 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753518 moonpuppy :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by rf_engineer See Profile :

how 2 meters and 70 centimeters could take the place of HF spectrum, considering neither band can travel around the world like HF. Still no answer.
Misdirection. Global communications weren't necessary for the Northwest floods, or Katrina. Just local communication back outside the disaster area where mainstream communications are available.

This is about the time hobbyists talk about extinction events like "Planet-X," meteor hits, nuclear war, etc. Uh huh.

Mark
Wrong again. Katrina affected a very large area where 2m communications (the band with more range than 70cm) would not have been practical or feasible.

Go troll somewhere else. :uhh:]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753518 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:34:38 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753498 amigo_boy :
said by rf_engineer See Profile :

how 2 meters and 70 centimeters could take the place of HF spectrum, considering neither band can travel around the world like HF. Still no answer.
Misdirection. Global communications weren't necessary for the Northwest floods, or Katrina. Just local communication back outside the disaster area where mainstream communications are available.

This is about the time hobbyists talk about extinction events like "Planet-X," meteor hits, nuclear war, etc. Uh huh.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753498 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:30:09 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753399 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Fine, what other frequencies are useful?

Do your research then get back to us.
It's been discussed many times before. 2 meter and 70 cm would work fine.
In your simplistic imaginary world it would be fine. And yes, it's been discussed many times before and you've been questioned many times before on how 2 meters and 70 centimeters could take the place of HF spectrum, considering neither band can travel around the world like HF. Still no answer.

On to the next recycled wrong solution from amigo_boy....]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753399 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 13:09:22 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753347 amigo_boy :
said by moonpuppy See Profile :

Fine, what other frequencies are useful?

Do your research then get back to us.
It's been discussed many times before. 2 meter and 70 cm would work fine. Of course, it would require hobbyists to really turn out and participate in civil service (forming nets back to undamaged locations where mainstream communications can be performed.). But, that shouldn't be a problem since we're always treated to these stories about hobbyists serving a valuable purpose. We just need to require more.

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20753347 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 12:59:36 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20752083 moonpuppy :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by Mactron See Profile :

So folks are suppose to invest time, money, and effort into something that can only be used when BPL is down ? Pretty hard to setup, test, and regularly verify a setup that's being Jammed by BPL 99.99 % of the time. Your thought needs some more practical thinking I believe.
Just use the other frequencies that aren't affected by BPL. It will make communication in a disaster more challenging (relay nets, etc.). But, we're always treated to this cheerleading for hobby radio, about how it serves a valuable public service. If that's true, it should be desirable to get more hobbyists engaged as a team.

From my perspective, there are a lot of hobbyists who are so just for the hobby, not the public service we're always hearing about. Maybe public service participation should be mandatory. That would go a long way to prove there is a responsibility that comes with using the public's airwaves.

This is where those with a vested interest will say the government will be effected by BPL, therefore hobbyists are just riding on the coattails of legitimate users. If that's true, why parade public service around? Just say HF isn't going anywhere, and therefore hobbyists can use it for whatever they want?

Mark
Fine, what other frequencies are useful?

Do your research then get back to us. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20752083 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:42:55 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20752074 moonpuppy :
said by ke4pym See Profile :

said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.
This isn't entirely true. If BPL is up and running in my disaster-less part of the world, then I'm going to have trouble hearing weak signals from a disaster area because BPL *IS* operational in my back yard.
So very true and it is the biggest point people do not realize. ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20752074 Mon, 07 Jul 2008 07:41:31 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20750211 rf_engineer :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

said by Mactron See Profile :

said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.

So folks are suppose to invest time, money, and effort into something that can only be used when BPL is down ? Pretty hard to setup, test, and regularly verify a setup that's being Jammed by BPL 99.99 % of the time. Your thought needs some more practical thinking I believe.

My 2 ¢
We have 4cents now.

Wouldn't it be nice if everything worked the way you want it.
The "no power, no interference" claim was debunked three or four years ago; it's a rather simplistic and severely flawed argument. Perhaps we should also dismantle our military during peacetime? No war, no military needed, eh?

As others have said, you can't train for emergency communications if there's no spectrum to train with and it's highly unlikely that citizens would spend thousands of dollars on equipment that would only be usable during mass power outages.

But this is all largely a moot point as most of the severely polluting BPL systems have shutdown and Internet access BPL is pretty much withering on the vine as it can't keep up with competing technology. The same marketing and legal drones who were spewing BPL propaganda with similar simple-minded answers back in 2003 and 2004 have moved on to other industries with their hockey-stick growth charts. But feel free to repeat the same material again...we all need a good laugh.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20750211 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:24:21 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20750145 rf_engineer :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

said by Mactron See Profile :

Your many Anti Ham, BPL Cheerleader Biased posts here precede you. No response required. ;)
FYI. I'm not pro-BPL. Just not buying the sales job radio hobbyists would like everyone to accept, unchallenged. Hobby radio may serve a valuable purpose. Maybe more should be expected from it. Maybe everyone can get by with FRS and CBRS.

You're anti-ham and anti-fact, history has proven that. We've been down the same road again and again arguing with you, so it's no use debating with you leading statements like "maybe everyone can get by with FRS and CBRS". You rarely back up what you say and when you do it's usually your own made up "facts".]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20750145 Sun, 06 Jul 2008 19:11:25 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20746175 amigo_boy :
said by Mactron See Profile :

Your many Anti Ham, BPL Cheerleader Biased posts here precede you. No response required. ;)
FYI. I'm not pro-BPL. Just not buying the sales job radio hobbyists would like everyone to accept, unchallenged. Hobby radio may serve a valuable purpose. Maybe more should be expected from it. Maybe everyone can get by with FRS and CBRS.

Everything should be on the table. And, question everything. Especially those with a vested interest in the position they want everyone else to accept.

This is about the time someone will say "but it's an international treaty, so you'll have to change that. Until then, leave us alone." Ok. But, like the argument that HF is used by the government (therefore, radio hobbyists are deriving a coattail protection from interference), why go into all the self-ingratiating backslapping about serving a public service? Just say it's protected by an international treaty? Why the sales job? If you're going to put on lipstick, cover blemishes and wear a push-up bra, expect someone to ask questions. :)

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20746175 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 16:56:12 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745713 Mactron :
said by amigo_boy See Profile :

Just use the other frequencies that aren't affected by BPL.

Mark
Your many Anti Ham, BPL Cheerleader Biased posts here precede you. No response required. ;)

Why don't don't YOU go use another means of communication other than the Internet...
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745713 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:47:06 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745594 amigo_boy :
said by Mactron See Profile :

So folks are suppose to invest time, money, and effort into something that can only be used when BPL is down ? Pretty hard to setup, test, and regularly verify a setup that's being Jammed by BPL 99.99 % of the time. Your thought needs some more practical thinking I believe.
Just use the other frequencies that aren't affected by BPL. It will make communication in a disaster more challenging (relay nets, etc.). But, we're always treated to this cheerleading for hobby radio, about how it serves a valuable public service. If that's true, it should be desirable to get more hobbyists engaged as a team.

From my perspective, there are a lot of hobbyists who are so just for the hobby, not the public service we're always hearing about. Maybe public service participation should be mandatory. That would go a long way to prove there is a responsibility that comes with using the public's airwaves.

This is where those with a vested interest will say the government will be effected by BPL, therefore hobbyists are just riding on the coattails of legitimate users. If that's true, why parade public service around? Just say HF isn't going anywhere, and therefore hobbyists can use it for whatever they want?

Mark]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745594 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 14:14:54 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745147 anon : DStar is cool technology. I thought about using it as part of my counties Winlink deployment (www.winlink.org), however it would eat a big chuck of my ARES/RACES budget, best bang for the buck was the 1.2ghz radios, but that is short range line of site and in my hilly terrain would require microwave links.. too complicated to the KISS environment you try to work with in during an emergency or disaster.. so I went with a TS-2000 and Pactor 3 which will allow my group to stay in touch via e-mail to the outside world with an RF link 600 - 700 miles away to a PMBO in Nova Scotia. I think I would be better off setting up wireless G on Steroid's than DStar from a cost effective perspective.

Steve
N2UBP
(I've been on the Internet since 1988 and Fidonet.
I've left so many tracks I have nothing to hide.) ]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20745147 Sat, 05 Jul 2008 12:21:32 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20741356 Surfinusa :
said by Mactron See Profile :

said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.

So folks are suppose to invest time, money, and effort into something that can only be used when BPL is down ? Pretty hard to setup, test, and regularly verify a setup that's being Jammed by BPL 99.99 % of the time. Your thought needs some more practical thinking I believe.

My 2 ¢
We have 4cents now.

Wouldn't it be nice if everything worked the way you want it.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20741356 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 12:06:24 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20741273 kv5e :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.
Poor implementations of BPL affect the HF spectrum which primarily utilizes skywave propagation. The problem with poor implementations of BPL is they make it difficult to hear communications coming in from areas further away where the emergency operations are taking place (need to think three dimensionally here).

Amateur radio is not the only users of the HF spectrum, poor implementations of BPL affect all HF users.

I think the BPL scale of economy wil be limited to SCADA for the electrical providers and they will be using BPL in a way that is sustainable for all.

I would like to address the VOIP statement. VOIP is not limited to the National Information Infrastructure or internet. DStar and other links may be configured with redundant WAN routers and hardened RF links on the PHY layer between gateway nodes. Need to think out of the box a little more as it is IP over some PHY layer and although the NIIS is easy, they are other and redundant solutions.

Craig]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20741273 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:48:48 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740829 Mactron :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.

So folks are suppose to invest time, money, and effort into something that can only be used when BPL is down ? Pretty hard to setup, test, and regularly verify a setup that's being Jammed by BPL 99.99 % of the time. Your thought needs some more practical thinking I believe.

My 2 ¢
--
If only the Verizon CSRs worked this well. ;)]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740829 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 10:03:13 EDT Re: Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740751 ke4pym :
said by Surfinusa See Profile :

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.
This isn't entirely true. If BPL is up and running in my disaster-less part of the world, then I'm going to have trouble hearing weak signals from a disaster area because BPL *IS* operational in my back yard.]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740751 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:39:43 EDT Nice http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740670 Surfinusa : Ham Radio operators provide a vital service in times of need.

Just a thought though BPL service could be down in case of a disaster so there wouldn't be interference. Possibly at some point they could co-exist. No power no interference. Disaster no Power.

As far as the article interesting reading except it mentioned the FCC administers the Ham exam 35 question test.

Actually it is not the FCC but authorized individuals with a license from the FCC are allowed (2)persons to administer the exam.

And no they don't get paid by the FCC so they are not FCC employees.

Other than that.

Another wonderful Ham to the Rescue story.

I love my Ham.

Lovely]]> http://www.dslreports.com/forum/remark,20740670 Fri, 04 Jul 2008 09:11:01 EDT