 Radio ActiveMy pappy's a pistolPremium
join:2003-01-31
Fullerton, CA | I wonder what this report actually means... The ARRL article »www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/···/1/?nc=1 has some very good documentation in terms of what, when, where, how, etcetera...
But the parameters were not fully explored/documented. Here's why.
There was not a full "data load" test... only what I would characterise as "sync test" and was only at a "quiescent" state, with no "real" data being exchanged. This should be explored more fully before we "conservative" hams can give our support to this technology (not that "our blessing" is needed for the "powers that be" to move forward  ).
What will happen when each branch is fully "lit up" and active? This is a question that has not been fully answered.
In terms of scientific testing, this has not produced quantifiable or repeatable results (IMHO). It fails to conform to the term "scientific method".
I would like to hear rf_engineer follow up on this point...
Don't get me wrong-I am gratified to see preliminary results that seem to prove wrong my doomsday attitude regarding BPL... I want exhaustive, complete testing to be done. This test is neither exhaustive nor complete.
We are getting close to a solution. More must be done to perfect this "broadband alternative." I await this with much interest.
Cheers.
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. You know what I hate? Indian Givers... No, I take that back. »www.folsomtech.com |
