If we assume that there are 100 million households in
the U.S. and that there are 20,000 active HF stations
sprinkled uniformly throughout this population of 100
million households, then we can conclude that the
probability that an active HF operator will reside in a
randomly selected household, is about 1 in 5000. If
BPL trial sites pass "blocks" that ecompass 1000
households, then the probability that an active HF
station will be close to a field trial site is about 1 in 5.
If there are 10 field trial sites in the US, then you are
talking about only a handful (2 or 3) active HF operators
that have active BPL trial systems passing their homes.
Since BPL will in most cases only be a really big
interference problem for amateurs that are located in
neighborhoods served by BPL where their antennas are
within a several hundred feet of the RF energized
powerlines, it is not surprising to me that there has
been a lack of interference complaints to date.
I don't think we want to wait for BPL to be passing 20
million homes before we find out Mike was wrong. Let's
get out in our mobiles and do more measurements
on active sites.
73 de Mike, W4EF..................................................
----- Original Message -----
From: "Pete Smith" <n4zr@contesting.com>
To: <ka5s@earthlink.net>; "Hare,Ed, W1RFI" <w1rfi@arrl.org>;
<rfi@contesting.com>; "Stephanie WX3K" <wx3k@ptd.net>
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 11:47 AM
Subject: Re: No More Nice Guy? (was RE: [RFI] BPL video FAQs)
> At 10:20 AM 8/9/03 -0700, Cortland Richmond wrote:
> >Stephanie (and list members),
> >
> >One of the arguments made by BPL proponents is that they have received no
> >complaints.
> >
> >Considering the 20 August cut-off for Reply comments, if harmful
> >interference is shown to be BPL related I think we hams need to take note
> >of it in our Replies, as well as *filing formal complaints to the FCC* in
> >parallel with complaints to perpetrators.
> >
> >We have in the past accommodated a lot of interference because we could
> >work around it. Perhaps it is also time to stop doing that. BPL
proponents
> >and others who would put RF on power wiring seem to assume that
compliance
> >with Part 15 is good enough (though more than a few want even that
> >relaxed); we know it is not. The Commission, with few of our complaints
in
> >its files, has little data to back up our assertion. I expect it will get
> >some, now.
>
> With the limited extent of BPL tests in this country, the probability that
> an HF or low-VHF op would a) recognize the weird interference as BPL and
b)
> complain officially about it makes it very unlikely that anyone has much
of
> a complaint record yet.
>
> I respect Mike a lot, but I also think that Ed is fully competent to tell
> the difference between BPL of various types and the other types of
> power-line-associated RFI. Just looking at the video is a poor substitute
> for reading the ARRL's submission.
>
>
> 73, Pete N4ZR
> The World HF Contest Station Database was updated August 4.
> 123 stations were added or updated.
> Are you current? www.pvrc.org/wcsd/wcsdsearch.htm
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>
|