[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next] - [Date Index][Thread Index][Author Index]

Re: [officers] Re: "Two Hundred Meters and Down," 2003edition



Grant Zehr wrote:

> Well, yes, but that's kind like saying you're in favor of smog because it
> will give you a reason to wear a full-face respirator.  Pollution is
> pollution....save DSP, FEC etc. for cases when the noise is unavoidable.

I just came up with a better analogy. You've lived in a desert area for 
many decades. All that time you've driven the same old car (nothing 
rusts in the desert) without smog controls. This was never a problem 
when your area was sparsely populated.

But with the enormous population growth in your area, air pollution has 
become a serious problem. And now you're complaining because they don't 
want you driving your old car anymore. You maintain that because you 
were there first, you shouldn't have to change anything; everyone else 
should simply move away and leave you alone.

My point is that inefficient analog modulation methods cut both ways. 
Not only are they easily interfered with, but they cause a lot of 
interference to others because of the high power levels required to 
produce acceptable signal-to-noise ratios. So far the emphasis seems to 
be on the interference it can cause to the amateur service, but I can't 
imagine that there won't also be a lot of interference *to* BPL by 
amateurs, aggravated by the very high power levels many amateurs use on 
HF. If the FCC is really determined to approve BPL, the potential for 
interference *from* the amateur service *to* BPL could represent the 
more serious threat to the amateur service.

Don't get me wrong, BPL does seem like a very bad idea. Given the wide 
deployment of other broadband technologies such as DSL, cable modems, 
satellites and point-to-point (or point-to-multipoint) terrestrial 
microwave links it seems unnecessary to deploy such a "leaky" system 
that will impair *all* uses of the HF spectrum and be so susceptible to 
interference from many external sources. We should argue against it on 
those grounds, not because it will interfere with our ancient analog ham 
radio technologies.

Phil

----
Sent via amsat-bb@amsat.org. Opinions expressed are those of the author.
Not an AMSAT member? Join now to support the amateur satellite program!
To unsubscribe, send "unsubscribe amsat-bb" to Majordomo@amsat.org



AMSAT Top AMSAT Home