Topband: AMRAD weighs in on BPL

[Donald Chester]

>BTW it also does not help that
>several spelling and editing errors crept into the
>AMRAD filing.
>

Wasn't there a recently published memo from someone at the FCC or NTIA that 
was full of typos and spelling errors?  I notice the same thing in many of 
the comments on file.  I believe this does hurt the effectiveness of the 
effort, leaving the impression that the person is too careless to bother 
proofreading the document or too ignorant to see the errors.
>
>Personally, I see the need to stress that much of HF
>comms consist of weak-signal work... I think that
>the vulnerability of weak-signal work cannot be over-
>emphasized, and that is exactly what I told FCC.
>...went on to draw strong comparisons between
>DXing/contesting and emergency HF comms, many
>provided directly by hams in times of disaster. They also
>pointed out that HF comms from an airliner over the middle
>of the ocean might well be drowned out in the BPL din.

Also, the SIGINT (signal intelligence) and ELINT (incidental electrical 
radiation intelligence) communities ought to be concerned, since much of the 
military and civilian intelligence gathered worldwide, sponsored by the 
governments of all nations, is gleaned from weak signals monitored over HF.  
When I was in the military during the Viet-nam era, there were U.S. 
monitoring posts all over the world, including several in the contintental 
US.  I suspect many of them are still in operation.

Since NTIA effectively quashed the proposed 60m ham band, maybe they will 
also put a damper on BPL.  The only problem is the big bucks behind the 
latter.  To get an idea of how thoroughly the BPL lobby is entrenched 
worldwide, view the following URL and the links contained therein:

                                        http://www.plugtek.com/index.shtml

Don K4KYV

_________________________________________________________________
Get MSN 8 and enjoy automatic e-mail virus protection.  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus