[NLRS] ARRL and BPL

Thu, 12 Feb 2004 19:45:10 -0600

Hi Guys,

I work for an electric utility and I am personally involved with a possible
implimentation of BPL at my company. I have been and continue to be a
staunch defender of the HF bands although at times I often question why? I
have also sensitized the important people in my company and I know they will
"do the right thing".

I had been trying to connect ARRL and one of the manufacturers in order to
do a test of the compatibility. This test was performed in late January and
it seems that there may have been a pretty good demonstration of the fact
that SOME of the BPL technology can coexist, but not ALL of it.

The manufacurer I have been dealing with TRULY wants to find an acceptable
solution and I believe has the technology to do it.

I have had some early discussion with ARRL although of late they are not
answering my EMail.

I do believe the ARRL is doing a really good job in representing the hams on
this one. They cannot give a blanket endorsement to BPL because they are not
all created equal.

I hate politics of any kind and in spite of their past sins, I urge you to
support them. I am not a member of ARRL (only the Canadian equivalent.

I do not want to get into an on-line debate on this and ask you to not throw
assorted fruit at me if I make a presentation on BPL interference  at Aurora
04.

I will be objective then just as I will be when I speak  on the same topic
to a Canadian UTC conference at the beginning of March.

Best 73
Barry VE4MA
----- Original Message ----- 
From: "tom ring" <[email protected]>
To: <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, February 12, 2004 7:23 PM
Subject: Re: [NLRS] ARRL and BPL

> Hmm, the league screwing hams?  You're surprised?  This is not new
behavior.
> Remember incentive licensing?  Remember how it almost sunk the hobby?
>
> And they have done a ton of stuff to attempt to limit the band and power
rights
> of our friends to the north, which is why CARF used to be, and may still
be a
> lot of competition for the CRRL.  The VE3's that I knew when I lived just
south
> of Ottawa in northern NY despised the ARRL.
>
> I am not, never have been, and never will be a member of that
organization.
>
> Now off my personal stump, and I'll spout no more.  This was my one and
only
> rant about them.
>
> tom
>
> On 13 Feb 2004 at 0:14, Scott wrote:
>
> > Funny you mention that.  I was reading in one of my professional tech
> > journals that one company who is planning BPL stated in the article that
> > they had "tacit" approval from the ARRL.
> >
> > The ARRL sent me a letter asking me to join ARRL.  I said no thanks and
sent
> > them a copy of the article from the journal and asked them how they
could
> > state in their recruiting letter that BPL was a threat and then
"tacitly"
> > approve of one company's approach to BPL.  And yes, I do know what
"tacit"
> > means.  In other words, I got the impression the ARRL had no backbone to
out
> > and out say that ALL BPL is a threat.
> >
> > Please don't write that I'm bashing the only national group we have as
hams.
> > I am NOT asking any of you to resign or not sign up.  I just choose not
to
> > support organizations that I feel are a little two-faced in their
stance.
> >
> > Scott N0EDV
> > http://corbenflyer.tripod.com/
> > Building RV-4
> > Gotta Fly or Gonna Die
> >
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > NLRS mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs
> >
>
>
> ------
> Tom Ring K0TAR, ex-WA2PHW  EN34hx
> 85 Westphalia GL Albert
> 96 Jetta GL The Intimidator
> [email protected]
>
> "It is better to go into a turn slow, and come out fast, than to go into a
turn fast
> and come out dead." Stirling Moss
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> NLRS mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://mailman.qth.net/mailman/listinfo/nlrs