Search String: Display: Description: Sort:

Results:

References: [ +from:eedwards@tconl.com: 69 ]

Total 69 documents matching your query.

1. [RFI] FW: RF Noise Pollution - New One? (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 3 Jan 2004 09:48:55 -0600
Greetings! A DXer friend of mine has a strange noise that has recently came up. A link to the wav file of the noise is listed below. I've never heard anything like it before. I'm wondering if this is
/archives//html/RFI/2004-01/msg00001.html (7,723 bytes)

2. RE: [RFI] My power line noise problems, revisited (Warning, thisislong!) No... (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2004 12:00:33 -0600
AA6DX, I can tell you of a recent instance here in Omaha when two guys working near a power pole were instantly killed when a powerline unexpectedly drop to the ground and killed both men. They were
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00045.html (10,782 bytes)

3. RE: [RFI] Response to news FCC okays BPL proposal (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 14 Feb 2004 12:52:07 -0600
As someone who works for an electric utility, and in the telecomm department which handles Radio Interference calls for powerline noise, it would seem that utilities would expect a flood of such call
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00095.html (9,594 bytes)

4. RE: [RFI] Better Balanced BPL story (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2004 21:13:50 -0600
Not only is your description very perceptive, but there already is an example out there on how to accomplish just that. If you want to see how BPL might turn out in the future for Amateur Radio, watc
/archives//html/RFI/2004-02/msg00146.html (9,195 bytes)

5. RE: [RFI] re bpl qrm Reports (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 6 Mar 2004 11:39:10 -0600
If they've only rcvd 14-15 interference reports so far, no wonder they feel safe to proceed. I understand it's been in limited areas so far, so could someone at the FCC or ARRL Labs (since FCC won't)
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00023.html (7,270 bytes)

6. RE: [RFI] TVI (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 7 Mar 2004 12:32:26 -0600
So if you live in CA and have a ham next door and rcv interference; you call the FCC and they tell you they don't handle interference complaints any longer; and the ham's hands are tied by law and ca
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00039.html (9,193 bytes)

7. RE: [RFI] What About Manassas??????? (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 28 Mar 2004 12:07:37 -0600
Steve, It may mean that the roll our was only in a HOA/CC&R area where no active HF hams live. I think this was also the case in NC. Seems only prudent if you'd want to operate a BPL system for a whi
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00165.html (7,939 bytes)

8. RE: [RFI] Today's Wall Stree Journal front page article on hams & BPL (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Tue, 30 Mar 2004 21:00:05 -0600
Both of these complaints were posted to the BPLandHamRadio yahoogroup along with more data and info than anyone can imagine. I recommend to anyone trying to keep up with current developments to subsc
/archives//html/RFI/2004-03/msg00179.html (10,353 bytes)

9. RE: [RFI] PLCA Response to WSJ Article (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 17 Apr 2004 23:23:56 -0500
Thank you Michael! I was beginning to think you'd all forgotten your 1990s "Clintonese" in 4 short years. Obviously the money spent in research and testing to "eliminate claims of interference" was t
/archives//html/RFI/2004-04/msg00079.html (9,226 bytes)

10. RE: [RFI] BPL....(and more re UTC Meeting) (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 18 Apr 2004 00:01:19 -0500
--Original Message-- 5) Stick to interference with mobile stations and public safety. N2EA -- For years the FCC has let Nextel cause interference nationwide to critical infrstructure and public safet
/archives//html/RFI/2004-04/msg00080.html (9,120 bytes)

11. RE: [RFI] Protecting our frequencies (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sat, 1 May 2004 12:03:20 -0500
One huge difference is our HF bands have little or no commercial value, just the opposite of the UHF/SHF bands. Bill, No offense meant, but what the heck are you smoking? As long as hams are using th
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00008.html (10,338 bytes)

12. RE: [RFI] Protecting our frequencies (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 2 May 2004 17:36:46 -0500
Of course I do Bill, but with BPL we are not talking about putting these HF signals over twisted pair, cat 5, or shielded cable or some other appropriate medium. We are talking about placing them ont
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00021.html (9,473 bytes)

13. RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Mon, 3 May 2004 22:16:02 -0500
Yea, he voted for BPL before he voted against it. Sorry, couldn't resist such a good opening. Going back in my hole now. de k0il _______________________________________________ RFI mailing list RFI@c
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00038.html (7,306 bytes)

14. RE: [RFI] BPL Protest Opportunity? Give up? NO! (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 9 May 2004 20:25:32 -0500
Ed, I wasn't calling on the ARRL to give up the battle front with the FCC. Quite the contrary; it's because of the great work that you and the crew are doing at the League that I feel my limited effo
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00104.html (10,504 bytes)

15. RE: [RFI] More Thoughts on BPL (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Sun, 23 May 2004 22:15:17 -0500
Who besides the power company? Easy! A third party could easily pay the power company for bandwidth access to the powerlines thus taking all the risk away from the power company. This could even happ
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00152.html (11,813 bytes)

16. RE: [RFI] BPL on NPR (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Thu, 27 May 2004 07:25:29 -0500
Pete, I've not heard of any AMR being done on VLF or the old PLC because the data rates are just way too slow. PLC is mainly used for limited system control functions. Anything requiring a lot of dat
/archives//html/RFI/2004-05/msg00178.html (9,884 bytes)

17. RE: [RFI] Pin Arcing (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Mon, 19 Jul 2004 22:13:09 -0500
Or it could cause a line to fall into the wet grass your standing in. That killed two cable TV workers here in Omaha a few years ago. Talk about bad luck. Just go real easy on it if you must resort t
/archives//html/RFI/2004-07/msg00140.html (9,354 bytes)

18. RE: [RFI] Question re: Whole House Surge Protection (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Wed, 21 Jul 2004 21:15:26 -0500
Eric, One more thing to be aware of in the fine print of most of those power company power protection services: They probably won't cover lightning energy coming from anywhere else except the power f
/archives//html/RFI/2004-07/msg00165.html (10,005 bytes)

19. RE: [RFI] Documenting Power Line Noise (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2004 21:12:38 -0500
Ford, Based on your comments, I suggest you might do some reading up on how to track power line noise. Some good books are the ARRL's RFI Book, and also the Interference Handbook by Bill Orr and Bill
/archives//html/RFI/2004-08/msg00064.html (8,848 bytes)

20. RE: [RFI] From Communications Daily re: BPL (score: 1)
Author: Ed -K0iL <eedwards@tconl.com>
Date: Wed, 1 Sep 2004 19:25:30 -0500
Good question Dave. I'm just repeating what I was told by our marketing guys. I'll run that question past those guys at work tomorrow! (I'm just the dumb RF guy;-) I suppose it has to do with who pay
/archives//html/RFI/2004-09/msg00014.html (10,097 bytes)

Current List: 1 - 20
Page: [1] [2] [3] [4]
This search system is powered by Namazu