Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| reply to Surfinusa
Re: Nice
said by Surfinusa  :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.  |
|
Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
| said by Mactron :said by Surfinusa :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
 ·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| reply to Mactron
said by Mactron :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 |
|
Mactron
el camino Real
Premium
join:2001-12-16
CM94sv
| said by amigo_boy :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
4 edits | said by Mactron :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 |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by amigo_boy :said by Mactron :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". |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to Surfinusa
said by Surfinusa :said by Mactron :said by Surfinusa :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. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to amigo_boy
said by amigo_boy :said by Mactron :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| said by moonpuppy :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 |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by amigo_boy :said by moonpuppy :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.... |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| 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.
This is about the time hobbyists talk about extinction events like "Planet-X," meteor hits, nuclear war, etc. Uh huh.
Mark |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| 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. 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.  |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| 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 |
|
Surfinusa
Premium
join:2001-02-08
| reply to rf_engineer
said by rf_engineer :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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
| 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 |
|
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. |
|
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. |
|
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
·magicjack.com
2 edits | 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 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? |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| 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. |
|
