[CW] Introduction and a request

[Bill Owens N2RKL]

Although I've been subscribed for a little while this is my first post
to this list, so before saying anything else I'll introduce myself
briefly. I've had a lifelong interest in radio, nurtured by my dad and
his propensity for collecting interesting electronic stuff. I tried twice
as a kid to learn CW and couldn't, I think largely because I didn't use
the right technique. Finally got my ticket as a no-code Tech in 1992,
at the same time as my father incidentally, and passed 5 WPM in 1999 -
after an entire summer of practice. I typically identify myself as a
no-code Extra. However, my father and I have made a pact to get our code
speed up to where we can get on the air by this winter, in time for SKN
and the AWA Old-Time contest (he collects WWII vintage military gear). I
continue to think (hope?) that the CW operators I meet on the air will be
more forgiving, openminded and reasonable than those on the Internet. . .

That said, aside from code practice my current radio-related concern
is the FCC's Notice of Inquiry on Broadband over Power Lines/Power
Line Communications.  I know that it has been discussed here before,
and I'm sure that some of you have read it. For those who haven't, the
NOI itself is really a scary document. Although it identifies some of the
ways that we believe BPL will threaten amateur radio, it clearly shows
that the FCC is strongly in favor of BPL deployment. If nothing is done,
the FCC will certainly make rule changes in favor of the power companies
and manufacturers.

The comments filed by the BPL industry universally dismiss claims of
interference, and ask that the FCC actually increase the limits for
radiated emissions, or eliminate them entirely in favor of conducted
limits. I think that the ARRL filed a powerful comment, as did a few
other organizations, and a few of us tried to put our two cents in as
well. I know something about the subject but I'm not an RF engineer,
I've never designed a receiver, I can't really speak to the interference
question with authority. And the majority of the comments filed by
individual hams only served to show that they hadn't read even the NOI,
much less anything else about the issue.

I think that a few well-written, well-researched comments from people with
RF expertise and HF operating experience would carry more weight than
a hundred 'me toos'.  The reply comment period is open until August 6,
and after that it will be up to the FCC to decide our fate.

You may already have some of these links, but just in case:

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/  The ARRL page on PLC/BPL
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/06/19/2/ ARRL article on the NOI
http://www.arrl.org/news/features/2003/07/08/   . . . and on the comments
http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/files/FCC-03-100A1.pdf    The NOI itself
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/comsrch_v2.cgi       To search for comments

You can use the search page to pull up the comments from the powerline
industry groups and companies by putting 03-104 in the Proceeding slot
and a string to search for in the "Filed on Behalf of" slot. I'd suggest
searching for the following:

power (5 different hits)
ambient
current
main
amperion
intellon
phonex
ameren
southern

I think you'll be amazed by the claims that the industry groups make,
and horrified by the implications for our hobby. And if you decide that
you must discount what I've said because it came from someone who can't
(yet) manage 30 WPM, and you don't trust anything the ARRL says because
it hates CW, at least take a look at the last sentence of this document
from the United PowerLine Council:

http://www.uplc.utc.org/file_depot/0-10000000/0-10000/7966/conman/Bullet+Points+for+NOI.pdf

73,
Bill N2RKL