Re: [RFI] BPL news today's WSJ

["Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com>]

Right.  there are some "if"s.  Ed also included some conditionals.  here's 
the link to his assessment, for lack of a better term:

http://www.eham.net/articles/12770

I am also hoping that the higher frequencies will result in a shorter 
radiated distance from lines.

Look folks, i get the feeling that you all have somehow lept to the 
conclusion that I think this is okay.  I don't think that at all.  I am 
however, a realist.  This isn't going away any time soon.   The FCC is 
essentially ignoring hams.  All the engineering studies, the rational 
scientific analyses are being swept aside.  If the ARRL had NRA level fund 
raising and a multi-million dollar war chest, there would be the bucks 
needed to hire top drawer lawyers such as Gerry Spence and his staff plus an 
army of lobbyists and they might be able to go into federal court and get an 
injunction on depolyment based on the obvious uneven part 15 enforcement on 
this v. agressive enforcement of other kinds of power utility RFI such as 
arcing insulators.   But the $$$ just isn't there to take this to that 
level.  The only thing that's really going to stop this train are market 
forces, i.e. DSL, cable, wireless and satellite pricing BPL out of 
existence, and hopefully, the adoption of less invasive versions such as the 
one Motorola is working on.
Read the lastest ARRL news item on these guys getting 40 db over S9 RFI in 
Manassas Va. for how long--a year?--and the FCC hasn't done jack.  If it had 
been an arcing power pole, Hollingsworth would have been all over them by 
now.    the 30 to 50 mhz thing isn't great, but I bet if those guys in 
Manassas had a choice between it and what they have now, they'd go for the 
30 to 50 mhz bpl and hope it goes away asap.  Wouldn't you?

Rob / k5uj

p.s. while i blame the current administration for promoting this, I have no 
illusions about anything suddenly changing if we have a majority political 
party change in Washington.  I think both parties are equally uninterested 
in ham radio.

> From: kd4e <kd4e@verizon.net>
> Reply-To: kd4e@verizon.net
> To: rfi@contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RFI] BPL news today's WSJ
> Date: Tue, 20 Dec 2005 14:23:34 -0600
>
> "minimal RFI" presumes the following:
>
> 1.  They install everything according to spec.
> 2.  They maintain everything to spec.
>
> So, in theory it is just 6M and above that is
> subject to RFI ... unless there are additional
> artifacts from the generation of their 30-50MHz
> RF.
>
> We shall see ... ;-)  doc

_________________________________________________________________
FREE pop-up blocking with the new MSN Toolbar ? get it now! 
http://toolbar.msn.click-url.com/go/onm00200415ave/direct/01/

_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi