Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
1 edit | reply to rf_engineer
Re: Nice
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 ) |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to Surfinusa
said by Surfinusa  :said by rf_engineer :said by Surfinusa :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. |
|
Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
1 edit | reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :said by Surfinusa :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. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to Surfinusa
said by Surfinusa :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? |
|
Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
| reply to amigo_boy
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. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :said by amigo_boy :said by rf_engineer :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 |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by rf_engineer :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :You're a guy with a web browser and a blog login. Problem number one. You don't know what I am.
Mark |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by rf_engineer :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :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 |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by rf_engineer :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 |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy :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 |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :Does he pay taxes? He might but I doubt he wants the massive increases that come with what he is proposing. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to moonpuppy
said by moonpuppy :said by amigo_boy :said by moonpuppy :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? |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
2 edits | reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :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 |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by rf_engineer :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. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by moonpuppy :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| reply to Surfinusa
said by Surfinusa :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 |
|
