said by hayabusa3303 :

I dont think the Fcc cares one bit about anything but dont you cuss or show a nipple on tv they get on edge.

if there where more hams they might get heard.

just my.02 in this

said by hayabusa3303 :

I dont think the Fcc cares one bit about anything but dont you cuss or show a nipple on tv they get on edge.

if there where more hams they might get heard.

just my.02 in this

said by Tzale :

The FCC can go screw themselves if they think that the license I worked so hard to earn doesn't entitle me to freedom from noise on the bands.
-Tzale

said by MattE :

Tzale, good for you! That is quite an accomplishment.

It takes all of 15 minutes and a rudimentary understanding of electronics and radio propagation to take the test to become a HAM. You deserve your spectrum.

Progress is progress.

Please step aside and let progress take its course.

said by RayW :

You are better than 99.999% of Americans then. It took my 13 year old daughter about 20 hours of class and about the same amount of home work and two tries to get a license, and she is an 'A' student in school. Most exams have about an 80% pass rate, and I know that some of those people do put forth the effort to ask for help.

Step aside? Sure, I wonder if the family of the lady that one of my group called in life flight a few months ago for thinks like you do? Cell phones did not work, but ham radio still did. As I heard, weakly, and possibly not at all if BPL was heavily used in the area that took the call and routed it to the police.

said by MattE :

Progress is progress.

Please step aside and let progress take its course.

said by MattE :

Tzale, good for you! That is quite an accomplishment.

It takes all of 15 minutes and a rudimentary understanding of electronics and radio propagation to take the test to become a HAM. You deserve your spectrum.

Progress is progress.

Please step aside and let progress take its course.

said by MattE :

Tzale, good for you! That is quite an accomplishment.

It takes all of 15 minutes and a rudimentary understanding of electronics and radio propagation to take the test to become a HAM. You deserve your spectrum.

Progress is progress.

Please step aside and let progress take its course.

said by Tzale :

There isn't anything cooler than being able to chat with someone around the world, at random, never knowing who you will get...

said by dynodb :

Um... you just described the Internet

Sorry, just jerking your chain; I don't get the whole ham radio thing, but whatever makes you happy.

Still, one does have to question how much new broadband technology should be limited because it has a minor impact on a handfull of hobbyists in a given area.

said by rf_engineer :

Amateur Radio uses less than 10% of the spectrum potentially affected by BPL. The rest of the users are government, military, maritime, aeronautical, and international shortwave. Regardless if ham radio is involved, the wireless spectrum is a natural resource that we should preserve.

said by PDXPLT :

The counter argument however, is that most of the time, in most places, that spectrum is going unused: no one is broadcasting on it, and/or no one is listening (e.g., maritime frequencies far from water).

In the minds of those advocating "spectrum policy reform", if it is unused, it is being wasted. Just statically allocating chunks of spectrum for certain permanent, fixed uses, because in the 1930's there was no way to make radios and other devices "smart" and flexible, is an anchronism, they say. They argue that accounting for modern technology that can do things like detect the location of a device, access a database of licensees, listen for spectrum occupation, etc., the utilization of spectrum can be increased. Spectrum, by the way, that remains the property of the American people (in the U.S., at least), even when a license is granted to certain entities.

Go to the FCC website and do a search on "Spectrum Policy Task Force Report" for more background, and and insight into where spectrum regulation is going. The old "Command and Control" model of exclusive licensees is going away. You're already seeing the first steps of this: The recent unlicensed allocation in the 3700 MHz band, previously only used by satellite base stations on the east and west coasts. The FCC figured that unlicensed devices could now be built that would be smart enough to figure out if they are anywhere near these base stations. Another example: the 5 GHz Wi-FI devices that now operate in a band allocated to military radar, provided that they check for a rader signal first. Another example is the NPRM on operation of unlicensed devices in TV channels that aren't being used locally (the only real chance for rural broadband, IMHO).

When it comes ot BPL, most of the notorious problems have been centered around Mannassas, and a couple of trials from one particular equipment provider. And they've been such jerks about it by not fixing things. It's unfortunate. I've talked to a utility guy that say they've been doing it for years, quietly, just not for internet access, and with a carefully engineered balanced transmitter, not the cheap single-ended lossy ground return system used in the noisey deployments (which is used because it's cheap and easy). And there have been no interference complaints in Cinncinati, either. If no licensed users are complaining, by definition there can be no "harmful interference" as defined by the FCC. "harmful interference" requires that a licensed user be actually interfered with in a material manner, not just the theoretical possibility of interference.

said by dynodb :

Um... you just described the Internet

Sorry, just jerking your chain; I don't get the whole ham radio thing, but whatever makes you happy.

Still, one does have to question how much new broadband technology should be limited because it has a minor impact on a handfull of hobbyists in a given area.

said by dynodb :

Don't get me wrong; I'm not knocking your hobby... just saying I don't get it. I LIVE in Minnesota and don't want to talk to strangers here in person, thus don't have a desire to talk to them on the radio

Seriously, the ham radio people have a point... but so do the PBL people. The latter will serve more people, but the ham folks were there first.

said by dynodb :

I LIVE in Minnesota and don't want to talk to strangers here in person, thus don't have a desire to talk to them on the radio

said by JDC69 :

I understand both sides of this arguement and it is not an easy one to resolve. My father was a ham radio operator and as a result I used to go with him to some of the meetings held by the club he was a member of. The ham operators at those meetings were some of the most technically adept individuals I have ever met. Good god those guys could mod any damn thing it seemed like to fit their purposes. My father actually took a regular old 40 channel cb and added a few project boxes that housed some switches and other components (purchased from Radio Shack back when it was a ham operator geared store) and made it into a sideband rig that he used in his work truck. I must say that I appluad the knowledge and ingenuity shown by most ham operators. The internet community needs to attempt to model itself after the hams. More internet users need to educate themselfs about the current technologies and what is and is not possible. Start holding ISP's accountable for their shotty service and in the case of BPL do away with the companies who are producing trash equipment that is messing with the ham community. If there are deployments of BPL that do not interfere with the ham operators go with the same equipment in future roll outs. As consumers we do have the power to affect things like this as if no one suppots an emerging technology from a manufacturer it is sure to be short lived. So instead of argueing about this why don't we try working together on a solution. Put an end to the companies manufaturing half assed BPL equipment by simply refusing to purchase or use it. The ham operators do have a significant place as part of the communication infrastructure in our nation and they really are some of the smartest people you will ever encounter. If my understanding of what they are saying is correct then there are ways to deploy BPL with minimum impact on them. I am all for new technology and I do like the thought of something like BPL where it can reach the masses who have little other chance of ever seeing a broadband connection. So if there is a way to do that without screwing over the ham ops why not get together and make a push for that?

said by MattE :

Please repost what you just said ... only ... please use paragraphs.

said by rf_engineer :

Can't debate the information, attack the grammar.

said by AquaBlaze :

No...it's just that the logic train is really hard to follow when it's buried in a clump of text. Just at a glance, trying to read and comprehend your message begins to start a headache.

It's easier to read and follow, that's all.

said by rf_engineer :

It wasn't my message. Yea, it could use same paragraphs, but I can follow it.

said by hayabusa3303 :

I dont think the Fcc cares one bit about anything but dont you cuss or show a nipple on tv they get on edge.