Lynn, let me ask you this then:
Is it possible, considering the limited time available until Monday, to boil
down from the report a short summary? I don't know enough about the
technical details to do so, at least to do so accurately.
Seems to me that if we can give some such of a summary in with our last
minute comments, we might stand a (small) chance of at least placing some
reasonable doubt in the appropriate minds. A long shot, granted (especially
considering that the appropriate decision makers have either been seduced by
pie-in-the-sky promises of a technology that can't work, settled for the
equivalent of their 30 shekels of silver, or both) but maybe the only one we
have.
73, ron wn3vaw
"Badgers? Badgers!?! BADGERS!?!?! We don't need no stinkin' BADGERS!"
-- Raoul, Raoul's Wild Kingdom, "UHF"
----- Original Message -----
From: "Lynn Lamb" <w4nl@charter.net>
To: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>; <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 9:10 PM
Subject: Re: [TenTec] NTIA BPL Report released
Agree that few in the decision making chain will understand this report or
the overall impact of their impending decision. It's really about money and
big business.
I read all of the report and having retired from the government in
Washington, if we had written an Executive Summary this way, it would not
have been signed. IOW, this ES isn't, clear and simple. This is the part
of a report that most of the decision makers read.... and the only part in
most cases. One could conclude that it was on purpose?
BPL has the makings of a double head sword and it won't be pretty in the
years to come. Think about it.. are we going to give up our hobby?
The report: http://www.ntia.doc.gov/ntiahome/fccfilings/2004/bpl/index.ht
>From the ARRL on President Bush's position in a recent speech:
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/cta/
V/R, Lynn W4NL
----- Original Message -----
From: "Jim Brown" <jim@audiosystemsgroup.com>
To: <tentec@contesting.com>
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2004 2:22 PM
Subject: RE: [TenTec] NTIA BPL Report released
> On Wed, 28 Apr 2004 18:01:13 +0000, David Price wrote:
>
> >I read the report, sounded like a nail in the coffin to me for BPL.
>
> When read by an RF systems engineer, yes, it is devastating. When read
> by a non-technically educated person, it is not.
>
> The problem is that no one involved in the decision-making process has
> a clue about anything technical. AFAIK, none of the commissioners has a
> technical education. The format and tone of the report is certainly
> professionally objective and dispassionate -- but it also fails to
> frame the issues in words that the decision-makers can understand.
>
> A properly written executive summary (there is one) would outline the
> conflicts between the proposed systems, the findings re: testing
> methods, the interference potential, and the implications re:
> implementation in words that a non-technical executive could
> understand. It would say, in so many words, that the proposed systems
> aren't practical, and it would say why. This report is far too
> tentative in that regard -- you have to be an engineer to understand
> the conclusions.
>
> Jim K9YC
>
> _______________________________________________
> TenTec mailing list
> TenTec@contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
_______________________________________________
TenTec mailing list
TenTec@contesting.com
http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec
|