May 2003 - arrl-odv - reflector.arrl.org

[ARRL-ODV:8782] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 May '03

14 May '03

Joel, the delegation has now been named and delegation proceedings are closed. I'm not privy to them. However, I have every reason to believe that there will be a US proposal, and that it will represent an improvement over the status quo. I don't think I've been guilty of excessive optimism on 40 meters. For this weekend in Dayton it would be best to emphasize the extreme difficulty and complexity of the issue despite the fact that we have support from 25 countries in Europe for the ECP, 15 countries in the Americas for the IAP, and a handful of others. The ECP and IAP are both favorable, but they are significantly different and will have to be reconciled. The Arab States and Iran could throw a huge monkey wrench into the works if they decide they want to, not just (or even principally) on our issues but for the conference as a whole. They have experienced spokesmen capable of doing it. We may find ourselves subject to political forces well above the delegation level. Other than on the Morse requirement I'm not making predictions. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:53 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8779] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations You missed my point, Dave, or I didn't state it clearly enough. My remarks were in response to your comment: "The news is not as good as we had earlier been led to believe it would be, particularly with regard to LF." We've been led to believe things are going well with 40 meters, but I believe we're going to find out otherwise very soon. That was my point. Joel -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 4:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8778] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations The same considerations with regard to federal agencies with homeland security responsibilities do come into play at 7 MHz as at 5 MHz. One difference, though, is that we have pushed very hard on 7 MHz because this is our one chance to fix it. At 5 MHz, since we didn't get what we want at the start we can build a good record and try for relaxed restrictions fairly quickly. At least we got our nose in the tent. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:27 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8774] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations Given the current (continuing) attitude at NTIA and FCC regarding amateur radio, as was apparent today, how can we expect to convince them to "see it our way" regarding 40 meters??? I think we're hosed there also, and just haven't faced that fact yet. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8781] Re R & O 135.7 - 137.8 kHz and BPL
by John Bellows 14 May '03

14 May '03

Makes me wonder if some enterprising investigative reporter looking for a follow-up story on the vulnerability of our infrastructure might find it interesting that even after 25 years the Power Companies are unwilling to fix a power grid can be brought down by a radio the size of a notebook computer. Jay Dave said >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Before WARC-79 we tried to counter the power grid susceptibility argument by saying, gosh, if that's all a terrorist needs to do in order to bring down the power grid, we've done you a big favor by pointing out the problem and giving you a chance to fix it. They were not amused. And 25 years later, apparently they haven't fixed it. Dave

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8779] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Joel Harrison 14 May '03

14 May '03

FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur AllocationsYou missed my point, Dave, or I didn't state it clearly enough. My remarks were in response to your comment: "The news is not as good as we had earlier been led to believe it would be, particularly with regard to LF." We've been led to believe things are going well with 40 meters, but I believe we're going to find out otherwise very soon. That was my point. Joel -----Original Message----- From: Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ [mailto:dsumner@arrl.org] Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 4:42 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8778] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations The same considerations with regard to federal agencies with homeland security responsibilities do come into play at 7 MHz as at 5 MHz. One difference, though, is that we have pushed very hard on 7 MHz because this is our one chance to fix it. At 5 MHz, since we didn't get what we want at the start we can build a good record and try for relaxed restrictions fairly quickly. At least we got our nose in the tent. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:27 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8774] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations Given the current (continuing) attitude at NTIA and FCC regarding amateur radio, as was apparent today, how can we expect to convince them to "see it our way" regarding 40 meters??? I think we're hosed there also, and just haven't faced that fact yet. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8779] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 May '03

14 May '03

The gist of Chris's and my brief conversation this afternoon was that he should get back to Kathryn Medley and say, "Boy, you really let us down on LF. What are you doing for us to make up for it?" But that's behind-the-scenes stuff. In public, we need to remember that while the results fall well short of our expectations we've lost nothing and gained something -- not as much as we had expected and not as much as we thought we'd justified, but something. If this is perceived by members as a loss, shame on us for letting their expectations get out of hand. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:29 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8776] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations Dave, What's wrong with saying that? FCC doesn't mind letting it be known that they screwed us, then they sit back and smoke a cigarette and we run back to their door and light it for them! I see no reason in hiding the fact that we're pissed. Joel I'm trying to come up with an appropriate quote to give Rick Lindquist. My first reaction, "We got hosed," somehow doesn't seem sufficiently dignified.

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8778] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 May '03

14 May '03

The same considerations with regard to federal agencies with homeland security responsibilities do come into play at 7 MHz as at 5 MHz. One difference, though, is that we have pushed very hard on 7 MHz because this is our one chance to fix it. At 5 MHz, since we didn't get what we want at the start we can build a good record and try for relaxed restrictions fairly quickly. At least we got our nose in the tent. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Harrison, Joel (1st Vice President) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:27 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8774] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations Given the current (continuing) attitude at NTIA and FCC regarding amateur radio, as was apparent today, how can we expect to convince them to "see it our way" regarding 40 meters??? I think we're hosed there also, and just haven't faced that fact yet. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8777] Re: R & O re 135.7-137.8 kHz and BPL
by Sumner, Dave, K1ZZ 14 May '03

14 May '03

Before WARC-79 we tried to counter the power grid susceptibility argument by saying, gosh, if that's all a terrorist needs to do in order to bring down the power grid, we've done you a big favor by pointing out the problem and giving you a chance to fix it. They were not amused. And 25 years later, apparently they haven't fixed it. Dave -----Original Message----- From: Bellows, John ( Dir, Dakota) Sent: Wednesday, May 14, 2003 5:27 PM To: arrl-odv Subject: [ARRL-ODV:8773] R & O re 135.7-137.8 kHz and BPL If the FCC and the Power Companies actually believe an Amateur Radio allocation at 135.7- 137.8 kHz could so disrupt PLC control communications as to pose a threat to the national power grid (pgs. 12 and 16 R&O) how could they even consider using the power grid for BPL at any frequency at or near Amateur, Land mobile or other similar existing allocations? It is also interesting to note in paragraph 14 of the R&O the FCC and utilities seem to acknowledge the obligation under part 15 not to interfere with licensed services. " 14. Many of the utilities indicate the new amateur allocation would give amateurs the right to demand that interference from a PLC system be resolved. Many also submit that they would be forced to retune or replace their PLC's to avoid causing interference to amateur operators." Duh!!! These are the same folks pushing for BPL. Since every deceased College Logic Professor is busy spinning in his/her grave at the logic of FCC, I am forced to quote the great philosopher, Bugs Bunny ---- "What a Maroon!" Jay, KØQB

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8776] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Joel Harrison 14 May '03

14 May '03

FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur AllocationsDave, What's wrong with saying that? FCC doesn't mind letting it be known that they screwed us, then they sit back and smoke a cigarette and we run back to their door and light it for them! I see no reason in hiding the fact that we're pissed. Joel I'm trying to come up with an appropriate quote to give Rick Lindquist. My first reaction, "We got hosed," somehow doesn't seem sufficiently dignified.

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8774] Re: FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur Allocations
by Joel Harrison 14 May '03

14 May '03

FCC Releases R&O on New Amateur AllocationsGiven the current (continuing) attitude at NTIA and FCC regarding amateur radio, as was apparent today, how can we expect to convince them to "see it our way" regarding 40 meters??? I think we're hosed there also, and just haven't faced that fact yet. 73 Joel W5ZN

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8773] R & O re 135.7-137.8 kHz and BPL
by John Bellows 14 May '03

14 May '03

If the FCC and the Power Companies actually believe an Amateur Radio allocation at 135.7- 137.8 kHz could so disrupt PLC control communications as to pose a threat to the national power grid (pgs. 12 and 16 R&O) how could they even consider using the power grid for BPL at any frequency at or near Amateur, Land mobile or other similar existing allocations? It is also interesting to note in paragraph 14 of the R&O the FCC and utilities seem to acknowledge the obligation under part 15 not to interfere with licensed services. 14. Many of the utilities indicate the new amateur allocation would give amateurs the right to demand that interference from a PLC system be resolved. Many also submit that they would be forced to retune or replace their PLCs to avoid causing interference to amateur operators. Duh!!! These are the same folks pushing for BPL. Since every deceased College Logic Professor is busy spinning in his/her grave at the logic of FCC, I am forced to quote the great philosopher, Bugs Bunny ---- What a Maroon! Jay, KØQB

1 0

[ARRL-ODV:8775] Re: Logbook of the World Beta Test Period to Open
by Tom Frenaye 14 May '03

14 May '03

At 05:14 PM 5/14/2003 -0400, K1RO wrote: >Tomorrow (Thursday May 15) we will be posting a story on the ARRL Web site announcing the opening of the public beta testing period for Logbook of the World. We are finishing up the last minute details, including our first cut at customer support documentation. > >Those of you who participated in the initial tests last December and January will need to take a few extra steps to uninstall the old software and delete some files before installing the new sofware. You'll also need to request a new certificate valid for the beta test period, which will include instructions for accessing the Web site. All passwords and log data from the initial tests have been deleted. > >1) Uninstall the old software from your system. With my installation (Win98) there was an Uninstall option under the Trusted QSL folder in the Program list. Running it seems to have deleted everything including the directory. That seems simpler than manually deleting folders, or is there something I missed? -- Tom >2) Delete the folders with the old certificates from your system. >Under Win 2000 or XP that's usually: >C:\Documents and Settings\<Username>\Application Data\TrustedQSL > >Under Win 95/98/Me it's: >C:\WINDOWS\Application Data\TrustedQSL > >Please note that the Application Data folder may be a hidden folder and you may need to use the Properties tab to Unhide it and find the files. Be careful to delete only the TrustedQSL folders. > >3) Follow the links from the Web story when it's posted and download and install the new software. > >4) Submit a request for a new certificate for use with the Beta version and install it. This part works pretty much like the original system and will be spelled out in the instructions. > >Please let me or Dave Patton know if you have any trouble with this. > >Mark ===== e-mail: k1ki(a)arrl.org ARRL New England Division Director http://www.arrl.org/ Tom Frenaye, K1KI, P O Box J, West Suffield CT 06093 Phone: 860-668-5444

1 0