RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
1 edit | Good idea but...
From an engineering standpoint, BPL is not a very good idea just for the reasons stated in the article. I know that many people here could care less about the airwaves, but many people depend on that same set of frequencies for either a living, safety, or just plain communications.
I know that some people think that everyone will be on the net and no one will need the radio, but there are just too many requirements that will not be met by the net. Maybe if they came up with a safe and world wide wireless system, then net-to-net communications will be viable.
edit: On the third read through, if the power companies did fiber along side the power lines then they may have a gold mine. After all, fiber is immune to any interference except possibly at any repeaters. Thus you could run fiber right next to a 100KV line or a 110 V with no issues. And since in most cases you already have right away to the house, you do not have to gig a new path.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
wolfox
Gentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL
| Quite possibly...
The most well put opinion and statement of fact on the subject, to date. BPL needs to be reviewed and redesigned before it is considered to even be a remotely usable, viable alternative to broadband.
--
Nothwest Arkansas' ONLY all Techno Radio Webcast, powered by SBC DSL! |
|
myhoes
Michael Extreme User
Premium
join:2003-10-05
Laval, QC
clubs: | thanks for posting what the text was about in essence it was too long so i didnt read it 
--
And that my friends is what they say is..That! |
|
djrobx
join:2000-05-31
Valencia, CA
 ·PHONE POWER
 ·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T CallVantage
·Time Warner VOIP
 ·RoadRunner Cable
1 edit |  Great article!
Very well written, good job rf_engineer  . I completely agree with you. BPL is just too slow to be a real competitor to cable or DSL. If Powell wants more competition, he should figure out how to encourage FTTH deployment. BPL is like forcing a square peg into a round hole. We just don't need to be pushing "broadband" data over a mediocre copper infrastructure that's even less suited for broadband than the existing "hacks" that we have now.
--
\\ROB - a part of the SCB local network |
|
batmanst
join:2003-12-23
Beverly Hills, CA | it was a failure to begin with
power lines was never suited for broadband, the electrical current is too strong for anything else and the speed is only a little better then isdn. this technology sucks big time, two thumbs down! just as I thought even before it was introduced! |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| said by batmanst :
power lines was never suited for broadband, the electrical current is too strong for anything else and the speed is only a little better then isdn. this technology sucks big time, two thumbs down! just as I thought even before it was introduced!
Actually the 60 Hz electrical current was never an issue. That was just a token engineering effort in isolation. The big issues are the EMI generated and the gross inefficiency of a power conductor at the frequencies required.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
gwion
wild colonial boy
Premium,ExMod 2001-08
join:2000-12-28
Pittsburgh, PA
1 edit | Do I have to give my thoughts again? Or...
... has everyone already heard my position on this concept? These Tesla wannabes are misdirecting time and resources that should go to future-proof technologies and deployment strategies, not the idle geek musings of a half-century ago. I wish my car doubled as a helicopter... great for rush hour...
I wish I could just buy a washing machine and do my dishes in it and scrub the floors... maybe I could find one I can crawl inside of and get a quick shower, too? After all, it's already there, and it connects to the "water-network"? And I have a dryer, why do I need a "hair" dryer, too?
I wish I could drive on the subway tracks, maybe Detroit can come up with something? I wish my water and gas lines came in on the same pipe, it would save a lot of space, and they could just "de-mux" 'em, as they come in?
Apologies to "Jack's Mother" for stealing her line, but I wish the walls were full of gold... I wish a lot of things...
That my power lines carried my broadband is not one of them.
[PS- great article...  Thanks.]
--
Semper Eadem
"The seas shall rise up in the twinkling of an eye, and the dust of the ancients shall be restored. The winds shall fight together with a dreadful blast, and their sound shall reach the stars." |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net
1 edit | That nails it
This is among the best editorials I have yet read. It states the problems BPL has on many levels, good show RF':)
go to the site below for an excellent technical presentation on the subject. It is apparrent to people who take the time to do the research on BPL is that is nothing to invest in.
»intel.si.umich.edu/tprc/papers/2···-PLC.pdf
--
"Remember when hacking a loogy
it comes not so much from the lungs but from the soul." |
|
amenite
The Soylent - It's People
Premium
join:2002-11-21
Ridgewood, NJ
clubs:
·Verizon Online DSL
1 edit | reply to gwion
Re: Do I have to give my thoughts again? Or...
said by gwion :
...I wish my car doubled as a helicopter... great for rush hour...
...
It does sound wonderful, as long as you're the only one doing it. I can imagine hitting traffic, next thing you know there are 5000 heli-cars crashing into each other, raining debris and bodies on the expressway. Not so appealing in that scenario.
--
Time is an abstract concept invented by carbon based life forms to monitor their constant decay.
-Thunderclese |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
·XMission
| said by amenite :
said by gwion :
...I wish my car doubled as a helicopter... great for rush hour...
...
It does sound wonderful, as long as you're the only one doing it. I can imagine hitting traffic, next thing you know there are 5000 heli-cars crashing into each other, raining debris and bodies on the expressway. Not so appealing in that scenario.
I was reading an article on that a couple of weeks ago, and that was the reason stated for NOT having mass transit in the air. We do have the technology, just not the control.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
Darkk
join:2003-10-03
Almont, MI
·Charter Pipeline
| reply to Transmaster
Re: That nails it
I loved your well thought out and accurate post.
Nice Work!
One other aspect of BPL that I don't often hear mentioned is the effect it will have on the average radio *listener*.
These users cannot generate an on-air signal to cause any adaptive BPL technology to move off of a specific frequency. Just as a single couple talking in an empty restaurant causes little discernable noise, many people talking at once can raise that singularly weak noise level to a loud roar.
It is this cumulative effect as more and more BPL systems come online that should be of great concern. The overall noise floor will dramatically rise all across the country as these interfering signals propagate ionospherically. And the interference will be propagated world-wide.
I'd be willing to bet that the competing BPL systems might even begin to interfere with themselves.
Getting back to listeners...
Once the HF spectrum is polluted by BPL, private citizens will no longer have the ability to use inexpensive equipment to tune in to news and opinions from other countries around the globe via international shortwave broadcasts. The U.S. Government will have allowed an "Iron Curtain" to drop over the country, effectively cutting off individuals from the free and unencumbered infrastructure-free exchange of ideas and information.
Even the Soviet Union in the Cold War era was never able to implement a system which will be as effective at blocking the access to the HF spectrum as BPL will be.
Couple this with the disastrous changes the FCC is allowing in the AM band regarding IBOC transmissions (in-band on-channel digital, which is neither in-band, nor completely on-channel) and their wide bandwidth, interference-causing digital mode of operation, and you won't even be able to tune in a U.S. AM radio station from any appreciable distance.
The HF and radio spectrum is a priceless national treasure, one which should be guarded as vigorously as we protect clean air and water.
BPL simply can't work. It can't operate interference free. It may even begin to interfere with itself over time. And, it has no protection from licensed stations which have a legitimate need to operate in this spectrum for public safety. BPL won't affect just hams, it'll affect public safety, government and military, and private listeners too.
What we need are FCC appointees who actually have some engineering knowledge about the thing they are supposed to be implementing, regulating, and protecting.
The current state of affairs at the FCC and the ridiculous rulings coming out of the agency drive this point home far better than any words I might write.
Let's hope it isn't too late for common sense and good engineering to prevail. |
|
spamd
Premium
join:2001-04-22
Rockford, IL
·Insight Communicat..
| Say no to BPL
Look what I can do! |
|
|
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA | About time...
...this article got the attention it deserved! Well done, Goody.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. |
|
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| rf_engineer For FCC Chairman
Better hope them good ol' boys in Washngton, DC don't read your article; they may start fearing for their jobs!
Good work. As always, you have my thanks for articulating what I have not the writing skills to.
--
"Maybe" is twice as good as "No", but only half as good as "Yes"... »www.folsomtech.com |
|
nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | yes, but....
Michael Powell likes BPL, so it must be OK.
Surely, the FCC wouldn't do anything that hurts consumers;) |
|
N0JCG
join:2003-07-18
Minneapolis, MN
1 edit | Required Reading
This needs to be required reading for every utility CEO, not to mention all the FCC and media cheerleaders of this engineering mistake.
Great job, Goody! |
|
w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| by far the best
Yes this is by far the best written post I have seen since this all started. It not only states truths about the technology, but also some of the myths. My hat is off to you rf_engineer. Lets hope someone who has power reads this and it finally sinks in. Only a matter of time before the general public finds out what a nightmare it is, only then it will be too late. Will they remember that we warned them??? NO |
|
swarto112
join:2004-02-17
Tampa, FL
·Verizon FIOS
·Qwest.net
·CableOne
| BPL has rolled out....
Well, it has rolled out. Anybody on this forum know anybody using BPL in these areas?
»www.forcvec.com/bplcoop/ - charging $30/mo
»www.idacomm.com/bpl/ - in test phase |
|
swarto112
join:2004-02-17
Tampa, FL | FCC - here's a letter to the commision
»gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retr···14184139 |
|
OldTom
@aol.com
| Powell's Folly
rf-engineer is right on!
Michael Powell apparently wants to be a hero. Every time he talks about BPL he brings up the potential for service to rural areas.
Except no BPL proponent says that rural service is economical. In fact, UPLC wrote a paper saying that it's impractical except for distribution from a satellite downlink. Do the math.
Mr. Powell also says that BPL will bring broadband internet service to "underserved areas". I suppose this means places that don't have DSL or cable yet. Does anybody really think that the power companies can beat telcos and cablecos to the punch? The powercos tried a few years ago to dip into the REA (Rural Electrification Administration) pot to finance a fiber buildout. That didn't sell, so they're going another way (BPL).
When I write my comments to NPRM 04-37, I will talk about the following:
1. Every BPL installation must have an identifiable signal signature documented, publicly available, easily decoded. There is ample precedent for this in (for example) FCC station identification requirements on amateur, commercial, and public service licensed spectrum users.
2. Every BPL installation must include rapid automatic shutdown capability (that's already suggested in the NPRM).
3. A BPL operator must shut down its operation in any area where harmful interference is reported, and do so within 15 minutes (not weeks or months, as is the current practice with power company noise complaints, documented in FCC correspondence). Interference to public service or to amateur-in-public-service-mode is intolerable and must not be allowed to continue.
4. What we've seen so far in field tests is that (a) some BPL systems create lots of HF noise (Maryland and New York), (b) some BPL systems create little or no HF noise (Washington state). This suggests to me that (a) the current Part 15 limits are inadequate to protect HF, or (b) somebody who is field testing is falsely certifying Part 15 compliance, or (c) somebody is careless with the installation. I suspect that (a) is the closest to the truth.
5. The FCC states in the NPRM that it believes (incorrectly) that Part 15 is doing its job, because there are tons of Part 15 devices out there and there are very few complaints. But the FCC itself, in its literature and on its Web site, discourages complaints ("Take it to the manufacturer"). My microwave oven interferes (harmfully) with the AM radio that I listen to across the house. But do you think Panasonic (the oven maker) is interested? Nope. Maybe it's time to flood the FCC with complaints about Part 15 devices that interfere with licensed services (including AM broadcast).
One thing is certain. Comments to FCC 04-37 that say "I don't like it so don't do it" will be ignored. We need to argue with the NPR's points that are arguable, and do it with the clearest words (and cited references) possible.
Here we go! |
|
