[NLRS] wsj story , rebuttal

[chuck munce]

Gang
I got this via nv4v an old hs buddy, maybe we should renew our cq =
subscriptions!!
CHUCK MUNCE K0SQ


>>
>>I received the following this  morning.    It is a copy of a letter to =

>>the Wall  Street  Journal  by Richard Moseson   the editor of CQ=20
>>in  response to an article that appeared in the WSJ this past=20
>>Tuesday.  The letter speaks for itself and should be must reading for =
all=20
>>amateurs.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>March 25, 2004
>>
>>To the editor:
>>
>>As a journalist and an amateur radio operator (I am the editor of CQ=20
>>Amateur Radio, the world's largest independent amateur radio =
magazine), I=20
>>was distressed at the number of significant inaccuracies in Ken =
Brown's=20
>>March 23 article, "In This Power Play, High-Wire Act Riles Ham-Radio =
Fans":
>>
>>#1) "The nation's vocal but shrinking population of ham-radio =
operators"=20
>>isn't shrinking. The number of licensed hams in the United States is =
near=20
>>its all-time high (it peaked last summer at more than 685,000 and is=20
>>currently around 684,000, according to FCC statistics. In contrast, =
there=20
>>were 673,000 licensed hams at this time five years ago; in 1980, there =

>>were about 382,000. Far from shrinking, amateur radio in the United=20
>>States is growing and has nearly doubled its ranks in the past 25=20
>>years.). The American Radio Relay League's membership may have fallen=20
>>sharply in the past decade, but that has more to do with how the=20
>>organization is perceived by many hams than with the number or =
licensed=20
>>or even active hams.
>>
>>#2) While "a clash between the dots and dashes of the telegraph and =
the=20
>>bits and bytes of the Web" makes for nice copy, it doesn't paint a =
very=20
>>accurate picture. While Morse code certainly continues to be popular=20
>>among hams  it gets through in marginal conditions when virtually =
nothing=20
>>else will, and you need only your brain to decode it, not a=20
>>computer  hams primarily communicate using voice, digital modes (we=20
>>invented wireless e-mail networks in the 1980s) and yes, even the=20
>>internet to connect with other hams around the world. I am currently=20
>>reviewing a device that generates and decodes digital voice signals =
that=20
>>are sent through standard analog transmitters and receivers.
>>
>>#3) "Not too many decades ago, ham-radio operators were on the cutting =

>>edge of communications technology ... They spread word of disasters =
that=20
>>otherwise might have taken days to reach the public." No, not too many =

>>decades ago at all  in fact, the correct number of decades is zero. =
There=20
>>is a permanent ham station at the National Hurricane Center that's=20
>>staffed whenever a hurricane is near land. Why? Because when power =
lines=20
>>and telephone lines go down in a storm, ham radio is STILL the only =
means=20
>>of communication that reliably gets through in those critical early=20
>>hours. When the attacks of 9/11 destroyed New York City's =
ultra-high-tech=20
>>Office of Emergency Management, officials relied on ham radio during=20
>>those critical early hours to relay vital communications between=20
>>agencies. One FCC official has correctly described amateur radio as=20
>>America's "fail-safe communications system."
>>
>>#4) As for suggestions that we are losing our edge in technology, how=20
>>many other hobbyist groups have their own fleet of communications=20
>>satellites ... that they've built themselves? Hams around the world =
have=20
>>built and launched about 60 satellites since 1961, when we launched =
the=20
>>first non-government satellite ever placed into orbit. Hams today are=20
>>extending the distance limits of high-microwave frequencies, the next=20
>>"frontier" for wireless communications; and experimenting with laser=20
>>communications. Today's "hot ticket" technologies such as wide-area=20
>>wireless computer networking; and text-messaging and still-picture=20
>>transmissions via cell-phones, were pioneered by hams.
>>
>>#5) "To become a fully-licensed ham operator, people still need to =
learn=20
>>Morse code..." ... not since 1991, when the code requirement was =
dropped=20
>>for the Technician class license, which gives full privileges in the =
VHF=20
>>and UHF amateur allocations. Hams with Technician licenses are=20
>>"fully-licensed." Other license classes with additional privileges=20
>>continue to require a code exam, but at only 5 words per minute, and =
that=20
>>only because it was required by international rules until last summer. =

>>The FCC is currently considering more than a dozen petitions to bring =
US=20
>>rules into line with the new international regulations.
>>
>>#6) "Aging hams ... are dying." Yup, along with aging non-hams. Not =
much=20
>>we can do about that, except to note that hams and non-hams alike are=20
>>living longer today so they're not dying quite as soon as they might =
have=20
>>a couple of decades ago. "Fewer youngsters are replacing them." This =
is=20
>>hard to quantify since new privacy rules no longer allow the FCC to=20
>>collect and release birth dates of licensees. But there are two =
factors=20
>>at play here that skew the average age figures: a) there are fewer=20
>>youngsters, period. The baby boom created a huge population bubble =
that=20
>>is working its way into its 60s, and the average age for any activity=20
>>that includes baby boomers is inexorably rising; b) many of those =
boomers=20
>>are becoming hams for the first time in their 50s and 60s, pushing up =
the=20
>>average age. With today's advances in health care, these new hams =
often=20
>>have 20-30 years in which they can be active, contributing members of =
the=20
>>ham radio community. And since many of them are retired, they have the =

>>time to give to staffing emergency operating centers, etc., and =
providing=20
>>vital communications in disasters. These older-newer hams are assets, =
not=20
>>liabilities.
>>
>># 7) Hams "haunt a series of short-wave radio frequencies set aside =
for=20
>>them by the federal government in the 1930s." While some frequency =
bands=20
>>were assigned to amateurs (internationally) in the 1930s, we have seen =
a=20
>>steady growth in those allocations in more recent decades. Three new=20
>>allocations were made in the 1980s and one was made just last year. =
The=20
>>picture Mr. Brown paints of hams as ghosts of communications past=20
>>("haunting" frequencies since the '30s, for example), is just plain =
inaccurate.
>>
>>#8) "One favorite game: trying to contact someone in each of the=20
>>3,000-plus counties in the U.S." As sponsors of the primary award for=20
>>contacting all 3,077 U.S. counties, we are proud that it's a favorite=20
>>activity. But it's much more than a game. Since many remote counties=20
>>don't have many resident hams, "county-hunters" often put them on the =
air=20
>>by driving there and operating from their cars. This gives hams around =

>>the world experience in communicating with stations whose signals =
might=20
>>be weak  signals Broadband over Power Lines would likely wipe out; and =
it=20
>>gives the hams who drive to those counties a knowledge of places from=20
>>which they can operate and get signals out  essential knowledge in an=20
>>emergency or disaster. Better to take the hours you might need to find =

>>those locations while pursuing the hobby aspect of amateur radio than =
to=20
>>waste time searching for a spot in an emergency when every minute =
counts.
>>
>>#9) Mr. Brown poses a question asked by FCC Chief Engineer Ed Thomas,=20
>>"Why is this thing a major calamity?" but he doesn't try to get an=20
>>answer. Here's the answer: One of the many things hams have discovered =

>>over the years about the short-wave frequencies where BPL wants to=20
>>operate is that you don't need a lot of power to communicate over very =

>>great distances. Under the right conditions, a few milliwatts might =
get=20
>>you a contact thousands of miles away. BPL signals are essentially=20
>>low-power radio transmissions. Under those same conditions, they may=20
>>bounce off the ionosphere like any other radio signal and come back =
down=20
>>hundreds or thousands of miles away. Rather than enhancing =
communication,=20
>>though, they will block it. Hams tuning around the short-wave =
frequencies=20
>>searching for a weak signal from some remote corner of the globe won't =
be=20
>>able to hear it  and they also won't be able to hear the weak distress =

>>signal from a boat in the middle of the ocean somewhere that's in =
danger=20
>>of sinking, something that happens at least once or twice a year.
>>
>>#10) Hams are not the only ones threatened by BPL interference. Every=20
>>other user of spectrum between 2 MHz and 80 MHz is at risk. This =
includes=20
>>international short-wave broadcasters, the US military, the Federal=20
>>Emergency Management Agency, long-distance airline pilots, Citizens =
Band=20
>>(CB), some radio-control airplanes and boats, some baby monitors and=20
>>cordless phones, and some police and fire departments. The FCC and BPL =

>>industry say they'll avoid using certain frequencies where =
interference=20
>>occurs, but with so many spectrum users, and the possibility of=20
>>interference occurring hundreds or thousands of miles from the =
signals'=20
>>source, this "notching" technique will soon result in "all hole and no =

>>doughnut." It just won't work. Someone inevitably will suffer=20
>>interference. And once BPL is widely deployed, it will be virtually=20
>>impossible to un-deploy.
>>
>>Perhaps a better question for Mr. Brown to be asking than "Why is this =

>>thing a major calamity?" is "Why is BPL so important to the FCC?" It =
is=20
>>FCC policy not to promote any one particular technology, yet from=20
>>Chairman Powell on down to the staff level, this policy is being =
violated=20
>>with regularity as the FCC has become cheerleaders for a technology =
with=20
>>potential for massive interference to a host of long-distance radio=20
>>services and whose economic potential is unproven at best. Why is BPL =
so=20
>>important to the FCC? It's a question that may well be worth the=20
>>curiosity of the Journal's excellent investigative staff.
>>
>>Thank you for the opportunity to correct the inaccuracies in Mr. =
Brown's=20
>>article.
>>
>>Sincerely,
>>
>>Richard Moseson
>>Editor, CQ Amateur Radio magazine
>>
>>
>>25 Newbridge Rd.
>>Hicksville, NY 11801
>>516-681-2922
>>w2vu@cq-amateur-radio.com


--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
multipart/alternative
  text/plain (text body -- kept)
  text/html
The reason this message is shown is because the post was in HTML
or had an attachment.  Attachments are not allowed.  To learn how
to post in Plain-Text go to: http://www.expita.com/nomime.html  ---