Slashdot Mirror

They have used Morse, voice, and data modes. Voice is the most used, but Morse and very-narrow-band data modes are needed when signals are weak. The ARRL has details: http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/12/29/100/?n c=1

Actually, this is not really media contrived or a matter of opportunity knocking. I am part of the University of central Florida Amateur Radio Club (The Moderator can verify this if desired, I do not feel like giving out my email address to thousands).

Dr. Harpole (K4VUD) was actually part of what they called a DXpedition. Where he had gone , there had never in history been an officially sanctioned amateur radio station before. It was mere coincidence that he had been there 2 weeks prior that special permission had been granted for the radio operators to operate there. The ARRL has more on the DXpedition gone into emergency mode

Also, It should be noted that Dr. Harpole was not the only radio operator there. We have been keeping a series of links on this, however, which are available on the UCF Amateur Radio Club's wiki.


I would like to point out that I do not typically reply to Slashdot posts, however, this is actually something of which I am somewhat a part, and figure I should set things straight. (despite the fact people will still continute to put up off the wall posts on the subject anyway)

The DXpedition was under the Aegis of National Institute of Amateur Radio (India) and it was lead by Ms. Bharati (VU2RBI), an Indian. I know this, because I saw them off to Nicobar islands a few weeks ago and I have been monitoring their traffic over the last week. They are due back on the mainland today sometime. Read the list of the the operators and the ARRL's version

I believe so. At least some of the frequencies they're using are allocated for CW/RTTY. Luckily they were prepared for savage operating conditions even before the disaster. (QSO pileups on top of their DXpedition.)

A: Very likely. Contrary to your belief, it does not require that Joe Ham have a lot of power or a huge antenna on a tower to communicate with the other side of the world. Nor does it require repeaters on the HF frequencies.

I've been an FCC licensed Ham since 1958 at age 12 and operate only with low power (QRP to us hams) as a challenge precisely because making long distance contacts was too easy with even moderate power (say 100 watts) and modest wire antennas. I've communicated directly with Japan and New Zealand from my car in Illinois using a 4 watt transmitter and a 4 foot antenna on the trunk. If you get up to around 100 Watts and a reasonable wire antenna hung up in the trees in the back yard, you can very easily talk anywhere in the world, given reasonable conditions.

What good is it from the other end? I was with Project Hope in Tunisia in 1969 and provided daily "phone-patched" phone call service to the staff of about 150 people so they could stay in touch with their families back home, without having to pay the $13.00 for the first 3 minutes that the landline cost. It made a huge difference to the people on the hospital ship. In disaster situations, it's orders of magnitude more important. Some of my fellow hams here in the states provided similar communications for military and Antarctic bases for years.

To learn more about Amateur Radio, visit the ARRL website. ARRL Oh, and please, please, do not lump us in with CB folks, as nice as some of them are. Hams are tested and licensed to FCC standards prior to being allowed to put their transmitters on the air.

"Do the Right Thing. It will gratify some people and astound the rest." - Mark Twain

a) To talk to people in distant places

b) Perform public service (RACES/ARES, etc)

c) Be able to fix/build/repair your own radio gear.

Now, let's see what happens today:

a) Anyone can plug in a $4 mic, use VoIP, and "talk" to almost anywhere on Earth, no license or self-study required.

b) Whip out your cell phone. That is unless a disaster hits, and all the cell sites are down, or your 40 min. battery dies. Also the "big news guys" literally take over a cell site. CNN's truck logs in via cell at every major story, and keeps an open line as a backup. If even 200 reporters did this, kiss off any chance of getting a cell signal, since the towers would be overloaded

c) How many parts inside a modern radio are actually user-servicable? I mean, I *can* probably replace a blown out chip-capacitor, if I had to, but when it is smaller than a pencil point, and 5 seconds of extra heat would wipe out the printed circuit board by lifting the traces, is this something you would want to do to a $2000 piece of amateur radio? The new ICOM rig sells for more than $10,000! Who would ever want to "modify" something like that? Rich de KY6O (Extra class license holder. Proof that if I can do it, anyone can. For more info on obtaining a license, see http://www.arrl.org/ which is the official site of US amateur radio operations)

See also Flex-Radio which can transmit (if you have a license), has a similar price point (within 3dB ;-), works with GnuRadio software, and comes with its own Visual Basic software (source).

From the page:

"...amateurs have done experimentation that shows that as little as 5 watts of power from a nearby radio transmitter can seriously degrade the performance of BPL. In some cases, the interference logged off a BPL user, requiring a reconnection to the network."

So you can see, it would take very little effort for hams to pretty much kill BPL by driving up to some power lines, broadcasting crap on that frequency at 5W (most handheld tranceivers can hit 5W no problem) for a couple of hours (how's prime time sound (when most users are online)?) and then driving away, long before anyone can figure out where he is?

I tell you, I don't even use the portion of the spectrum that BPL causes interference on, but the total disregard by the FCC of their own rules makes me want to turn vigilante myself.

Section 5 of the FCC regulations state that any device operating must accept any harmful interference from any device that is licensed to operate at similar frequencies.

Now, that being said... because BPL advocates have much larger lobbies than amateur radio, they have managed to get the FCC to basically ignore their own regulations and all but 'stick it' to the ham operator, even though the ham is legally entitled to that slice of the pie.

The Amateur Radio Relay League site on BPL has a lot more information.

I remember an editorial in QEX not too long ago that suggested there were already political efforts under way to regulate the sale of high-performance ADCs.

SDR is eventually going to make the Stalinist wannabees on Capitol Hill very nervous indeed. There is already precedent for banning the manufacture and sale of certain types of receiving equipment (Electronic Communications Privacy Act, 1987), so I would not take the availability of this technology for granted if I were you. It wouldn't be the least bit surprising to see a Federal ban on private ownership of high-speed analog-to-digital converters at the IC level.

ARRL CEO: Amateur Radio's Issues with BPL All Come Down to Interference (Dec 16, 2004) -- ARRL CEO David Sumner, K1ZZ, has reiterated that Amateur Radio's primary issue with the deployment of broadband over power line (BPL) technology is its potential to pollute the radio spectrum. Sumner stressed that point this week in a 50-minute interview with reporter Marc Strassman for Broadband over Power Line World.

I can understand shutting it down or turning back on the "built in inaccuracy" or whatever if they SUSPECT a terrorist attack is about to happen and they know they are using GPS. But the way this is worded, that in the event OF a terrorist attack GPS would be shut down, seems to me that we would be WITHOUT GPS in the immediate aftermath of a terrorist attack!

This is incredibly shortsighted, let me give you a good example: In the immediate aftermath of Hurricane Charley, cellphones, telephones and existing radio systems were down in the areas hardest hit, but amateur radio operators swarmed the area and deployed new antennas and crank up towers and tons of radios for the first responders. In addition to that they deployed this amazing technology called APRS for the salvation army and others that allowed the participating groups to track in realtime the location of all of their vehicles.

Now, if your not familiar with APRS, it starts with a low powered radio, a GPS unit, and a device that hooks up to the GPS and the radio that transmits the GPS coordinates in digital format on the radio. Then, ideally, a central radio tower can hear these signals and develop a picture of where all the signals are based off of their GPS coordinates. Whats even more insane is that APRS has grown so much that satellites and even the international space station repeat and broadcast APRS signals!

So if GPS were shut down first responders would lose a valuable emergency coordination resource. Not to mention the fact that some police/fire already have similar systems in place, though generally such systems are wiped out in disasters, hence the amateur radio operators who are at the ready to redeploy communications gear.

Read more:
More on APRS
APRS on the ISS
Amateur Radio Emergency Communication

Okay, I may be "retro" but I'm not a Troll.

I'll take a stab and ask whether one of your IT people is also an Amateur Radio operator.

Many teenagers involved in the Scouts and Guides will have heard of Jamboree On The Air (JOTA) or JOTI (I for Internet) so the recognition for Amateur Radio might be there.

Get some local Amateur Radio operators to bring in some modern equipment to demonstrate bouncing signals of the various satellites or the International Space Station.

Alternatively, contact the ARRL (Rhode Island) folk, who are local to you.

Seriously, the FCC is now in charge of regulation of what you say, not how it is transmitted. After all, we have all this great technology will sort out QRM and other problems automatically, what with their silicon chips and such. Besides, from a political standpoint, most people don't understand technological issues anymore, and the FCC went from the realm of engineers and science to a way to get noticed in Washington. Remember the deficit elimination plan of Bill Clinton? Much of the money was to come from spectrum auctions. When they didn't happen as expected, the deficit skyrocketed. It really is too bad that people don't understand that the airwaves are a dwindling resource and that our government is more than willing to realize very short term gains for what will be a long term loss.

When there is lots of aurora, the ionospheric reflection of radio is also perturbed. Read this description of the week from the RF point of view. In summary, the High Frequencies (3-30MHz) lose out, but he Very High Frequencies (30-300Mhz) gain. In particular, the 6 meter (50MHz) ham band showed some interesting reflections. For reference, that's right around tv Channel 2 in the US. Imagine not only being able to see Aurora, but sense them with your own radio and talk to someone by bouncing radio waves off of the aurora!

VA2VYZ has some nice aurora pictures from Quebec.

Someone needs to mod the parent up more! This is something everyone's overlooking here. The Amateur Radio service in America is screwed if this becomes reality and the ARRL needs your help. Get your ham license today!

I think several trends are at work in amateur radio right now. First is that advances in chip integration have made it more difficult to homebrew equipment. There are fewer and fewer "catalog" parts around with simple functions. This, plus surface mount packaging, have made electronic products cheaper but electronic experimentation much more difficult for the average person.

Another trend is the commercial annihilation of distance. Talking across the country on two-way radio loses its thrill when one can do the same on a cell phone more or less for free, and much more reliably.

Software Defined Radio (SDR) is a bright spot in ham radio today. Forget about the Big Project flavor of Gnu Radio. Amateur SDR projects tend to be quite simple - sometimes ingeniously so - and approach the subject from the experimenter's point of view, not the engineer's. Most are based on the simple proposition that a recent commodity PC plus sound card make a pretty decent digital signal processor.

Organizations like ARRL and TAPR have encouraged digital radio up to and including SDR, though they have each tried to firmly guide the direction of amateur SDR. In fairness, ARRL has published many articles in its experimenter's magazine and in an excellent online compendium.

Two independent projects show the range of amateur SDR. The SDR-1000 is a hardware/software project turned semi-commercial, with a steep price of entry. Flex Radio Systems also has a unique definition of Open Source. On the other hand, the SDRadio project is an independent software receiver that is slowly morphing into a community effort. The project forum is brimming with good ideas.

There are other, loosely related projects such as narrowband signal processing and Digital Radio Mondiale (broadcast) decoders being done by hams. From these resources it's easy to see SDR as an emerging force in rejuvenating ham radio, even though today the various efforts are quite fragmented.

I think several trends are at work in amateur radio right now. First is that advances in chip integration have made it more difficult to homebrew equipment. There are fewer and fewer "catalog" parts around with simple functions. This, plus surface mount packaging, have made electronic products cheaper but electronic experimentation much more difficult for the average person.

Another trend is the commercial annihilation of distance. Talking across the country on two-way radio loses its thrill when one can do the same on a cell phone more or less for free, and much more reliably.

Software Defined Radio (SDR) is a bright spot in ham radio today. Forget about the Big Project flavor of Gnu Radio. Amateur SDR projects tend to be quite simple - sometimes ingeniously so - and approach the subject from the experimenter's point of view, not the engineer's. Most are based on the simple proposition that a recent commodity PC plus sound card make a pretty decent digital signal processor.

Organizations like ARRL and TAPR have encouraged digital radio up to and including SDR, though they have each tried to firmly guide the direction of amateur SDR. In fairness, ARRL has published many articles in its experimenter's magazine and in an excellent online compendium.

Two independent projects show the range of amateur SDR. The SDR-1000 is a hardware/software project turned semi-commercial, with a steep price of entry. Flex Radio Systems also has a unique definition of Open Source. On the other hand, the SDRadio project is an independent software receiver that is slowly morphing into a community effort. The project forum is brimming with good ideas.

There are other, loosely related projects such as narrowband signal processing and Digital Radio Mondiale (broadcast) decoders being done by hams. From these resources it's easy to see SDR as an emerging force in rejuvenating ham radio, even though today the various efforts are quite fragmented.

I think several trends are at work in amateur radio right now. First is that advances in chip integration have made it more difficult to homebrew equipment. There are fewer and fewer "catalog" parts around with simple functions. This, plus surface mount packaging, have made electronic products cheaper but electronic experimentation much more difficult for the average person.

Another trend is the commercial annihilation of distance. Talking across the country on two-way radio loses its thrill when one can do the same on a cell phone more or less for free, and much more reliably.

Software Defined Radio (SDR) is a bright spot in ham radio today. Forget about the Big Project flavor of Gnu Radio. Amateur SDR projects tend to be quite simple - sometimes ingeniously so - and approach the subject from the experimenter's point of view, not the engineer's. Most are based on the simple proposition that a recent commodity PC plus sound card make a pretty decent digital signal processor.

Organizations like ARRL and TAPR have encouraged digital radio up to and including SDR, though they have each tried to firmly guide the direction of amateur SDR. In fairness, ARRL has published many articles in its experimenter's magazine and in an excellent online compendium.

Two independent projects show the range of amateur SDR. The SDR-1000 is a hardware/software project turned semi-commercial, with a steep price of entry. Flex Radio Systems also has a unique definition of Open Source. On the other hand, the SDRadio project is an independent software receiver that is slowly morphing into a community effort. The project forum is brimming with good ideas.

There are other, loosely related projects such as narrowband signal processing and Digital Radio Mondiale (broadcast) decoders being done by hams. From these resources it's easy to see SDR as an emerging force in rejuvenating ham radio, even though today the various efforts are quite fragmented.

I am a ham radio operator, and I've both seen and been involved with situations the required creative thinking, extreme problem solving and lots of outside-the-box thinking to get things done. If you need an example, then check out the video here and try to tell me otherwise.

Programmers, coders, hackers and even the everyday computer enthusiast use these same ideas and techniques to do similiar things.

The only real differrences between them:
Radio operators are licensed
Radio operators have a specific 'area' they can play in (radio spectrum rules, band plans, etc.)
Radio operators are encouraged to try new things.

Coders and hackers on the other hand, when trying to find new ways to solve old problems or improve on things that currently exist continually get hit with stereotypes, copyright infractions, patent infractions, lawsuits and the like.

What's the real difference? The law. Radio operators take a test and get licensed to do what they do. Perhaps programmers and coders should look at a similar thing that could perhaps one day stand up in court or something. I know that certifications exist (I hold a few myself) but perhaps some recreation of a GPL or GNU license could help in that regard. Something that you have to test for, like a certification, that would give you at least some limited legal ability to examine source codes, security flaws and such and legally work on them in order to help the owner improve their product(s).

I know it seems far fetched, but if a 16 year old kid can get legal permission to operate a motor vehicle at speeds well over what is required to decimate a mammal on impact, why can't coders get something similiar? Something that would give them a little legal protection and allow them to function much as the Ham Radio folks do?

Can you elaborate a bit on the ETSI firmware? Can it be put on any b router? Got a link to a site with more info?

There's a bit more to it than that. While we hear alot about amateur radio being affected, and the amount of concern being voiced, it goes well beyond the HAM operators.

The affected radio spectrum is quite broad, and the amount of spectrum allocated to the amateur service (HAMS) is only a small part. In the same bands are various other services including a large amount of commercial and government frequency allocations. They will not be immune to the interference potential that has been tested and measured by the amateur radio community in the various trial areas.

Let me add that HAMS aren't opposed to BPL just to be difficult, but because there are numerous problems with the technology and there are other good (better) but underdeveloped alternatives. The field trials done so far have shown that it is very difficult to eliminate harmful interference to the areas of the radio spectrum involved.

For more information about BPL and the concerns of amateur (and by extension other) radio services, see this FAQ; it is perhaps the best discussion of BPL and the issues around it I have read. Also, you can check the ARRL, which has a very good discussion of the topic.

I would further note that those like me who pursue the amateur radio hobby are not unlike many of those who read slashdot, who pursue computers as not just a profession, but also as a hobby. I have seen many argue about changes to computing platforms that would restrict or possibly eliminate our abilities to pursue the computing hobby (e.g., palladium).

I am a Ham too, but BPL seems to already be obsolete. As soon as WiMax is available, it will beat out all BPL systems both in quality, cost and speed. See WiMax Home and compare it to the problems with BPL as stated by the ARRL .

:)

I'm sure it was an honest mistake, but it's the ARRL: Amateur Radio Relay League.

</pedantic_mode>

Believe me, the main reason amateur radio operators perform as well as they do in providing emergency services is because they practice, practice, practice. Practicing this is so important that there is an international multi-day emergency communications simulation drill that is run every year called field day.

This year the International Space Station was involved in field day! My local Ham Club had the use of BOTH the county fire department's mobile operation center AND the sheriff's mobile operation center as well on site for field day this year! And this is a county with 1.2 million people in it! This goes to show you how important just PRACTICING emergency preparedness is.

In truth I'm not really that worried about BPL. It's interference properties goes both ways, amateur radio can interfere with BPL just like BPL can interfere with amateur radio. I've also heard that BPL can interfere HDTV reception as well but I'm having problems pulling up the articles. In other words, until they fix the interference problem, consumers won't accept internet service that gets interrupted everytime their local ham fires up their kilowatt amplifier to talk to someone in Russia.

" Even though they are expensive, in the end they are probably more reliable anyway in the kinds of situations where radio communication is essential."

I disagree. Ham radio operators (myself included) pride themselves in being competent masters of radio technology. We might be called amateurs but you do need to hold a license in order to participate. Amateur radio operators have a network of likeminded individuals who ensure that we are there in the case of emergencies. Preparation is important to us as well as the ability to talk to anyone, anywhere, from anywhere. We need no electricity (generators, solar power, etc) and we need little time to organize.

Ham radio operators assist the red cross and the military with communication. For more information you might want to see:

this as well as this and this.

We are the ones there, first, when shit hits the fan and communications need to be set up.

" Even though they are expensive, in the end they are probably more reliable anyway in the kinds of situations where radio communication is essential."

I disagree. Ham radio operators (myself included) pride themselves in being competent masters of radio technology. We might be called amateurs but you do need to hold a license in order to participate. Amateur radio operators have a network of likeminded individuals who ensure that we are there in the case of emergencies. Preparation is important to us as well as the ability to talk to anyone, anywhere, from anywhere. We need no electricity (generators, solar power, etc) and we need little time to organize.

Ham radio operators assist the red cross and the military with communication. For more information you might want to see:

this as well as this and this.

We are the ones there, first, when shit hits the fan and communications need to be set up.

You probably should clarify: Legal bodies (states/towns/counties) must make "reasonable accomodation" according to PRB-1 and various state equivalent pieces of legislation.

However, the federal level PRB-1 does not cover covenents, as the FCC was hesistant to rule on the matter. I do not recall if any of the state level ones attempt to do so. I have not seen a discussion on what the FCC said about renting, although I presume that falls in a simialar category.

The Amateur Radio Relay League has a lot of material on this subject, including copies of the federal and state laws.

You probably should clarify: Legal bodies (states/towns/counties) must make "reasonable accomodation" according to PRB-1 and various state equivalent pieces of legislation.

However, the federal level PRB-1 does not cover covenents, as the FCC was hesistant to rule on the matter. I do not recall if any of the state level ones attempt to do so. I have not seen a discussion on what the FCC said about renting, although I presume that falls in a simialar category.

The Amateur Radio Relay League has a lot of material on this subject, including copies of the federal and state laws.

You probably should clarify: Legal bodies (states/towns/counties) must make "reasonable accomodation" according to PRB-1 and various state equivalent pieces of legislation.

However, the federal level PRB-1 does not cover covenents, as the FCC was hesistant to rule on the matter. I do not recall if any of the state level ones attempt to do so. I have not seen a discussion on what the FCC said about renting, although I presume that falls in a simialar category.

The Amateur Radio Relay League has a lot of material on this subject, including copies of the federal and state laws.

> The FCC has ruled repeatedly with regards to HAM Radio antennas, DBS dishes and OTA TV antennas that landlords cannot unduly restrict tenants from installing them.
I'm sorry to inform you that this is incorrect. The FCC's OTARD fact sheet clearly states that protections do not extend to ham radio. It's quite a big deal if you happen to live in an area (such as an entire state) that is full of these restrictions that are ostensibly part of voluntary contracts.

Read more about antenna restrictions and join the fight -- the way the FCC is going these days, it may soon be easy for landlords to prohibit 802.11 devices in entire housing developments and "offer" you their own leased-line service for only nine ninety nine ninety nine ninety none...

> The FCC has ruled repeatedly with regards to HAM Radio antennas, DBS dishes and OTA TV antennas that landlords cannot unduly restrict tenants from installing them.
I'm sorry to inform you that this is incorrect. The FCC's OTARD fact sheet clearly states that protections do not extend to ham radio. It's quite a big deal if you happen to live in an area (such as an entire state) that is full of these restrictions that are ostensibly part of voluntary contracts.

Read more about antenna restrictions and join the fight -- the way the FCC is going these days, it may soon be easy for landlords to prohibit 802.11 devices in entire housing developments and "offer" you their own leased-line service for only nine ninety nine ninety nine ninety none...

>A lease that says I can't use a HAM radio on the property is unenforceable.
Unfortunately, a lease that says you can't have a ham radio antenna is enforceable.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

>Can a landlord restrict use of a technology by explicitly putting it in the
>contract? The answer may seem obvious, but keep in mind that anyone can put up a
>DirecTV dish in their apartment no matter what the landlord says. And if they
>were allowed to, would landlords start restricting the use of WiFi as part of
>their contract or demand payement for it?
>I think that's what the FCC is trying to avoid.

It seems very likely to me that big developers will soon start prohibiting 802.11 access points in new housing developments, and instead profit from the fiber lines that they put in, and we'll have absolutely no recourse.

Here's why:

Satellite TV antennas are specifically excepted from the CC&R (codes, covenants, and restrictions) by FCC regulation. Other types of antennas, such as amateur radio antennas (see Antenna Restrictions are excluded. Note that part of the 2.4 GHz 802.11 spectrum is actually a ham radio band, and the wireless APs are FCC Regulation Part 15 devices...so you can't even get around CC&R (or HOA -- homeowner association) rules by claiming it's for ham radio use.

Fortunately, PRB-1 prevents local government from prohibiting antennas or over-regulating them, but nothing prevents CC&Rs or Homeowner's Associations from doing so. In fact, a bill recently made it through the Hawaii legislature only to be vetoed by Hawaii's Republican Governor on the grounds that it interfered with "private contracts." Unfortunately, when big developers develop half of a town and put CC&R's in place, they're impossible to remove. Good luck finding somewhere to live.

Join the fight against senseless antenna restrictions.

oops, forgot the link:
ARRL link

That's why I am an Amateur Radio perator (Links for USA, Australia UK).

Every little bit of Amateur education in radio and electronics helps interest people in the bigger science too, and there are some great techniques and articles produced by Amateurs, e.g. Ian Purdie VK2TIP on all sorts of subjects; spread-spectrum, digital signal processing, and packet radio; etc.

Our local radio club did a foxhunt sometime last year.

Antennas ranged from simple yagis, phased paper clips on a yardstick connected with coax, a mailing tube and aluminum foil, one guy even had his hand held radio inside a metal trash can. Most were homebrew, but some were commercially built.

It's pretty easy to do, actually. Some people used bi-directional antennas, rotated them until they could no longer hear the signal, and then went off to either of the null directions. Others used highly-directional antennas to point them in the right direction. Aiming it towards the transmitter might get you close to the right direction, but having a null in the back somewhere really helps to pinpoint things. You just keep doing this until you find the signal source.

You just have to worry about the terrain affecting the transmitted signal (your antenna might lead you to where the transmitted signal is reflecting off something). Oh, and you'll get lots of strange looks from people.

As the parent said, check the http://arrl.org/.

From the looks of these antennas, we're going to need a bigger Pringles can!

...a manufacturer can certify their hardware with the highest gain legal antennas of each type (yagi, omni, etc.) and then end-users can swap in antennas of equal or lesser signal characteristics...

This means that the listed performance characteristics (coverage pattern and gain, primarily) for access points will become basically useless while shopping for AP's because the numbers that the manufacturer uses in their specifications will represent "best case" antennas. At microwave frequencies, even tiny variations in the antenna can make a tremendous difference in its performance.

There have been problems for years in the ham radio arena with manufacturers advertising gain values for antennas which can't be duplicated by real-world users. The ARRL's magazine, QST, refuses to accept ads which list gain values for this very reason.

...a manufacturer can certify their hardware with the highest gain legal antennas of each type (yagi, omni, etc.) and then end-users can swap in antennas of equal or lesser signal characteristics...

This means that the listed performance characteristics (coverage pattern and gain, primarily) for access points will become basically useless while shopping for AP's because the numbers that the manufacturer uses in their specifications will represent "best case" antennas. At microwave frequencies, even tiny variations in the antenna can make a tremendous difference in its performance.

There have been problems for years in the ham radio arena with manufacturers advertising gain values for antennas which can't be duplicated by real-world users. The ARRL's magazine, QST, refuses to accept ads which list gain values for this very reason.

As an amateur radio operator I enjoy having the HF bands in a semi-useable state. BPL is a bad idea in my humble opinion.

-73s

Field Day scores are much lower than VHF QSO or the Big HF contests. VHF QSO party scores might be vaguely comparable to Sweepstakes scores, multiplying by Grids or Sections gets big numbers. Since the biggest multiplier in FD is 10 for CW at a QRP-only station, scores are a lot smaller than in contests with #qso * #regions scoring.

We had a good VHF opening to the NE and SW during Saturday evening, worked EMA->AL & TN on 6m with only 50w & a halo on 50MHz SSB. (That's VHF Broadcast TV (as in rabbit-ears) Channel 1 for the rest of you.)

Our Boston Amateur Radio Club W1BOS 4A EMA was but one of 21 or so club stations in Eastern Mass. ARRL Section and Division staff between them visited all pre-announced club sites but one -- missing only Nantucket and the two surprises.

Visited the Tampa Amateur Radio club's field day operation but didn't participate this year, some photos up here - http://www.hamclub.org/. (Warning: server is already running slowly and I haven't even posted it to /. yet!)

The story I have to share is this-- it was very cool, they had the use of both the City of Tampa's police department's mobile command post as well as the Hillsborough Country Fire Rescue's mobile command post going with stations in each (all running on emergency power of course), plus a handful of RVs running on generators as well. Of course they also had traditional stations as well as slow scan tv, satellite communications and digital mode communications going as WELL as a "get on the air" station for any NON hams who want to, well, get on the air! Another interesting sight was the use of one of the fire department's chevy suburban trucks to anchor down the third guy wire on a 100 foot collapsable tower. (You can see that particular truck on the bottom of the club homepage, unfortunately NOT hooked up to the tower).

The City of Tampa and Hillsborough County and the Tampa Amateur Radio Club have a very close relationship and constantly drill and practice for emergency communications. And since Field Day is really just a big emergency communications drill (although every type of ham communications is represented) its no suprise the city and county let TARC use their equipment for this.

Unfortunately they had a lightning strike on the 100 foot tower in the middle of operations that took out a beautiful Icom 756pro-ii (http://www.icomamerica.com/amateur/hf/ic756proiim ain.asp. But that was the only loss (and they had a backup one ready to go). All in all it was awesome to check it out, maybe I'll participate next year!

For more on field day, check out the rules and also here's a nice little blurb about it

Cheers

...cars hanging around your house a lot its time to led line the walls.

In any situation like this, someone invariably gets picked as a 'test case.' Jim just happened to be the one.

What he experienced in terms of RF 'noise pollution' would become all too common if BPL were to be widely deployed. The NTIA report and the ARRL's own technical committee have demonstrated this in gruesome detail.

Want some more real-life examples of the kind of crap BPL is capable of spreading? Go here.

There are plenty of existing ways to deliver broadband to homes without polluting the HF spectrum. BPL exists only to serve the pocketbooks of its equipment manufacturers, and the shareholders of power companies, at the expense of EVERYONE (not just amateur radio ops) who uses the HF spectrum. If it becomes widespread, commercial aviation, military, and the federal government's HF users will ALL be affected in short order, and it will probably get shut down anyway as a result.

Why waste any more time on it at all?