#1 below is extremely optimistic. However, #2 is where I'm hopeful.
The more we holler about BPL (and we should!), the more will be done
to make it less disastrous before it goes live. I hope. The ARRL is
right to fight it, and though we might not win the battle, we might win
concessions enough to make it bearable, at least some of the time.
In other words, a compromise of some sorts.
And yes, I agree that BPL implementations could indeed be made short-lived
by other newer technologies. I live in a semi-rural area -- no cable,
no DSL. My high-speed internet is 2.4GHz wireless -- works good.
(P.S. I do sense the probability of a dramatic rise in 6 & 10m beacons
operating at 50 to 100 watts continually, and other 100w beacons on
other bands while the operator is nearby, in order to let the BPL folks
know we're there? What about beacons near the BPL equipment site?)
Dave NØRQ
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bill Turner" <wrt@dslextreme.com>
>
> Unlike many sky-is-falling hams, I see BPL as a non-issue for two
> reasons:
>
> 1. FCC rules say we are absolutely protected from interference from
> BPL.
>
> 2. Wireless in the GHz region is going to become the dominant mode
> within a few years. Large amounts of $$$ are being poured into
> developing WiMax and other systems and I believe they will totally
> replace BPL.
>
> Opinions may differ, but those are mine.
>
> --
> Bill, W6WRT
_______________________________________________
RFI mailing list
RFI@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
|