how-to block ads
|
spurious
join:2001-06-09
Florence, OR |  Re: Disappointing
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. | |
|  raIDERspeed
join:2002-07-26
Soledad, CA | Re: Disappointing CHP is still on the VHF low band system | |
| 
aSic
application specific
Premium
join:2001-05-17
Wakulla, FL
clubs:
| 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. | |
| | shashinka
join:2000-09-16
West Boylston, MA | Re: Disappointing 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. | |
| | | 
DaDogs
Semper Vigilantis
Premium
join:2004-02-28
Deltaville, VA
| Re: Disappointing 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
| Re: Disappointing 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 | 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. | |
| | | |
|
