TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ
 ·Sprint Mobile Broa..
 ·Comcast
|  BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
No matter how hard people try and no matter how little progress BPL is making on rollouts, it seems the technology just won't die. Now Motorola is trying a Canopy/Wimax BPL hybrid. And even those areas where it is being tested makes no sense. They keep trying to test these in built up areas where there is plenty of competition from DSL and Cable instead of in rural areas where a hybrid Wimax/BPL might make sense. Oh well!!
--
--
Join Red Room Forum
My Web Page |
|
TScheisskopf
World News Trust
join:2005-02-13
Belvidere, NJ
·Sprint Broadband D..
| I have not been a big fan of BPL.
That said, when a company with the presense and mega-footprint on the RF industry starts working on solutions and starts saying they are getting close to nailing the problems, I sit up and listen.
A company like MOT, for instance. Because they are not gonna crap where they eat.
If they nail it, then broadband to rural locations is a fait accompli, and the incumbents got themselves a world of problems.
And I think they can nail it. |
|
G_Poobah
join:2004-01-17
Schenectady, NY
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
Why does it seem that the idea of 'competition' is offensive to you in some way then? What if makes more sense to roll it out in a well developed area, to add more competition to the landscape. It's a WELL PROVEN fact, that in area's where there is REAL competition, the prices are lower for everyone, and everyone wins. (except of course, the shareholders and CEO's). The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the greedy.
Case and Point : Verizon vs. OOL. Verizon 30/5 is 199/month in area's where OOL doesn't offer Burst, yet it's only 59/month in area's where Burst exists. Hmm.. a win for the customer then! Naturally, Verizon uses the courts to prevent ANY competition from existing, then they can change it from 199/month up to 1,599.00/month, like they do with their T-1 lines. |
|
kdandaoc
join:2003-10-13
608052427
| wheres waldo?
I'm for anything that could potentially lead to rural broadband access, preferably using an existing infrastructure. The alternative will be some meathead in the 2008 presidential race promising another USF to cover the expenses that broadband providers won't!
Wheres Moe Howard when you need him? |
|
Ebolla
join:2005-09-28
Dracut, MA
| reply to G_Poobah
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
Dont think he was saying competition is bad or offensive, it just would honestly make more sense to test it in an area not already saturated with other services.
If a company came into an area with cable/dsl services and said "we are testing this new service" alot of people wouldnt go for it since they already have a broadband connection... or likely do at least.
Now in a rural area with dialup only it is easier to do testing and setting up the services, especially since these area's should be the targeted regions for this type of services as DSL CO is too far and cable in those area's may or maynot have internet up and running.
And the whole point behind this (correct me if I am wrong as I am sure someone will ^^)is testing the services, not mass releasing country wide. |
|
RayW
Premium
join:2001-09-01
Layton, UT
clubs:
 ·XMission
| Well, The hams are taken care of but...
If this is the one that is suppose to take up low VHF, then you still have a bunch of folks that still use those frequencies, like 'public service' and some radio astronomy. Those people will not raise a fuss until there has been a lot of money spent and enough users on to really cause trouble.
I remember one year we were operating around 36-45 MHz and were unable to talk to units several miles away (Sacramento River Delta in California) yet we could talk to helicopters in Virgina. Of course that was a high peak sunspot cycle and now we are at the bottom of a very (I think) weak trough for a year or so more. Wonder what will happen when/if this technology for some reason gets really big and the next sunspot cycle is very active?
Of course, maybe all the radio users will be up in the microwave range (antennas and the radios are a lot smaller) and it will be a null issue. Although low VHF does have the advantage that although it is considered line of sight, it still curves around things like mountains and buildings a bit.
--
I am not lost, I find myself every time. |
|
TKJunkMail
Enjoy the sun
Premium
join:2002-03-03
Avalon, NJ | reply to Ebolla
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
 |
|
RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| reply to RayW
Re: Well, The hams are taken care of but...
This is wireless distribution/backhaul to the secondary side of the service transformer with what is essentially "homeplug" over the 220 v single-phase drop to each house from the transformer. It does not traverse anything on the primary side. The Homeplug technology has been around for awhile and doesn't require the large signal levels "true" BPL does.
--
Toolmaster of La Grange. |
|
p51d007
Naa-P51d Mustang
join:2002-06-07
Springfield, MO
| Motorola, or the ham community will figure it out
If anyone can figure out how to make BPL work, WITHOUT killing
VHF lowband, then it will be moto and or the amateur radio
community. Aside from the ham radio guys who provide VITAL
communication in a natural disaster (hurricanes etc), there
are a ton of public safety agencies that have a network nationwide that uses lowband VHF and HF. Unless those agencies switch to satellite communication, there isn't any other form of reliable communication than using the HF bands.
Once the noise problems are addressed, I don't think anyone will have a problem 
73's de KB0GNK
--
Coming to you from the home of Ozark Mountain Country. Where the air is clean, fishing is great, and we actually wear SHOES! |
|
wondering pawn
@optonline.net
| reply to TKJunkMail
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
Why did the Hamster`s group allows NEXTEL to interfere with Emergency Communications since mid-1990`s ... if it was vocally fighting against BPL for fear it will interfere with 911 system... is this a bias campaign ????
from: USA TODAY Posted 1/15/2006 8:51 PM
Swap of airwaves encounters snags
By Paul Davidson, USA TODAY
A long-awaited swap of airwaves aimed at eliminating cellphone interference with emergency-service radios across the USA is in turmoil, prolonging communications problems and risking public safety, law enforcement officials say.
Public-safety officials and consultants largely blame cost disputes with Sprint Nextel, which is bankrolling the $2.8 billion project. They fear the spectrum transfer, which began in July and is to be completed by mid-2008, could be delayed or done improperly, further hindering communications.
Sprint Nextel says the disputes were to be expected.
"We have significant concerns that the process has been stalled," says Robert Gurss of the Association of Public-Safety Communications Officials, which last week voiced its concerns to the Federal Communications Commission. "Interference could endanger lives."
Since the mid-1990s, Nextel cellphones have disrupted public-safety radio systems in hundreds of cities, including Seattle, Miami and Denver. The reason: Frequencies used by public safety and Nextel are interlaced. The problem sometimes hampers emergency response, such as when firefighters at a 2004 Elks Lodge blaze in Mesquite, Texas, could not use their walkie-talkies.
That year, the FCC approved a plan to move Nextel and public safety to separate blocks of spectrum. Sprint Nextel, which acquired Nextel last year, will get prime airwaves valued at $4.8 billion. In exchange, it must give up airwaves worth $2 billion and pay for retuning radios, estimated to cost $2.8 billion. But if retuning costs more, Sprint Nextel must pay up, even if it loses money.
That caveat has prompted the company to dispute nearly all of the dozens of funding requests public-safety agencies have made and to not even respond to many of them, say emergency responders and their biggest adviser, RCC Consultants. Unresolved feuds are being reviewed by a mediator whose decision can be appealed to the FCC.
Sprint Nextel "is arguing over every cent," says RCC chief Mike Hunter. For instance, he says, the company disputed the $14,000 that Manasass, Va., schools seek to retune radios for their buses, saying $8,000 should be sufficient.
Sprint Nextel denies pinching pennies. "We are committed to spend whatever it takes" but want to "make sure costs are appropriate," says company executive Geoffrey Stearn.
Public-safety agencies and RCC also assail the project's managers, led by BearingPoint. Despite netting more than $20 million in fees so far, the managers haven't closely monitored negotiations or prodded Sprint Nextel to be more responsive, they say.
BearingPoint's Brett Haan, who's overseeing the swap, said the managers "take the concerns of public safety very seriously" and are working "to make sure the (project) is fast, fair and efficient."
The FCC is "looking into these issues," said spokesman David Fiske. |
|
plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA
·Charter Pipeline
| I've said it before...
What's the point of using HomePlug for last-10-feet if you already have the WiMax on the transformer? Why not just go WiMax all the way to the subscriber? Or go WiMax/WiFi? Hell, that'd be even better, you'd have a whole area blanketed with broadband rather than just the homes. Walk over to a house on the end of the block, or another area with similar service, and your laptop is still connected...
But I digress. What's the point of using BPL at all at that point? |
|
wonderingaboutbpl
@secureserver.net | reply to wondering pawn
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
Wondering pawn, you know if there is any BPL service in New Jersey? |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| reply to wondering pawn
said by wondering pawn :
Why did the Hamster`s group allows NEXTEL to interfere with Emergency Communications since mid-1990`s ... if it was vocally fighting against BPL for fear it will interfere with 911 system... is this a bias campaign ????
Because the band which Nextel and trunked radio operate are not used by the HAM radio community and therefore, we have no say in how those are used.
AND, if you bothered to do any research, you would have known that one of the big obstacles to swapping the frequencies was Verizon. Verizon wanted the space the FCC was giving Nextel (before the merger) to be auctioned off (so that Verizon could buy it themselves.) The end of that was when Nextel gave up the copyright on "Push to Talk" that Nextel had associated with their service.
That year, the FCC approved a plan to move Nextel and public safety to separate blocks of spectrum. Sprint Nextel, which acquired Nextel last year, will get prime airwaves valued at $4.8 billion.
Above is noted the spectrum that Verizon wanted. |
|
ColateralDMG
join:2005-06-13
Mcdonough, GA
1 edit | reply to plattypus1
Re: I've said it before...
Hey you could use the BPL to get the line to the area then use a small Wi-Max antenna to cover the neighborhood. I think that would allow for less infrastructure to be invested in than HomePlug which I think needs to have some kind of in home install. This reminds me of DSL fiber to the curb then copper the last 10-feet. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by ColateralDMG  :Hey you could use the BPL to get the line to the area then use a small Wi-Max antenna to cover the neighborhood. I think that would allow for less infrastructure to be invested in than HomePlug which I think needs to have some kind of in home install. This reminds me of DSL fiber to the curb then copper the last 10-feet. BPL needs repeaters every 2000 feet or less. It's not a long haul network technology or a replacement for fiber or telco T1 facilities.
Amperion uses BPL for its "backbone" and gets the data to home via WiFi. You still need to get the Internet to the BPL feedpoint though. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to wondering pawn
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
said by wondering pawn :
Why did the Hamster`s group allows NEXTEL to interfere with Emergency Communications since mid-1990`s ... if it was vocally fighting against BPL for fear it will interfere with 911 system... is this a bias campaign ????
How ironic you're promoting BPL and then posting about the Nextel interference fiasco. If anything, this illustrates what happens when outdated regulations are not changed to reflect current spectrum usage. BPL is essentially using outdated regulations in FCC Part 15 that allowed intermittent narrowband radio frequency energy emitters so that small unlicensed consumer devices could exist like kid's walkie-talkies, garage door openers, cordless phones, etc. BPL takes this little regulation and totally exceeds its intent, putting a 7x24 hour broadband signal on a distributed antenna system covering a large geographical area.
The difference between the Nextel fiasco and BPL is the FCC was told BPL would be a problem. Companies like Motorola who have wireless experience knew it as well and changed their design accordingly to include component-based filters. Current Communications for the most part avoids HF radio spectrum. Companies like Amperion and Ambient with software-based notches but still attempting to use HF spectrum are at a disadvantage. Companies demonstrating to utilities that they can prevent interference issues and not sweep them under the rug will be getting the contracts from utilities.
BPL could interfere with public safety frequencies in VHF bands where some BPL systems are moving, but organizations like APCO have been rather quiet. BPL is going to interfere with whatever services are on the frequencies it uses due its unshielded medium, the power line. This is why BPL should have never gotten off the drawing board. But I digress.
It's funny how you bash "hamsters" for not speaking up about the Nextel issue which the public safety community was vocal about, yet we're portrayed as villians when we're vocal about our own spectrum and let others defend theirs. The "bias campaign" is all yours. |
|
ColateralDMG
join:2005-06-13
Mcdonough, GA
2 edits | reply to rf_engineer
Re: I've said it before...
said by rf_engineer :BPL needs repeaters every 2000 feet or less. It's not a long haul network technology or a replacement for fiber or telco T1 facilities. Amperion uses BPL for its "backbone" and gets the data to home via WiFi. You still need to get the Internet to the BPL feedpoint though. I'm not talking about the BPL's internet link to the neighborhood but I see your simple misunderstanding. I'm just talking of getting the link from the BPL node in the area to the homes after the repeaters and the like.
Wouldn't investing in a wireless tech for the neighborhoods coverage make it just a little cheaper to deploy ,less wires to run. |
|
W1RFI
join:2003-05-12
Burlington, CT
| ARRL and Motorola
I usually respond to posts individually, but this may be a good opportunity to make a number of points all in one place.
In the fall of 2004, Motorola approached ARRL, wanting information about Amateur Radio and feedback on how they could design a BPL system that would not have major interference problems. After a non-disclosure agreement was signed, ARRL and Motorola worked closely, discussing needs and solutions. Although ARRL has had some discussions with some BPL manufacturers, not all of them are willing or able to work cooperatively with radio users, and to this date, none have communicated as throughly as Motorola nor have others done as much in actual joint work together on EMC issues.
The end result was Motorola's PowerLine LV system.
ARRL had analyzed the design and tenatively concluded that it should not pose a major interference risk to Amateur Radio. This was outlined in a story on the ARRL news crawl:
»www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/05/23/1/
ARRL and Motorola both wanted to see this in practice, so more or less together, engineers for both organizations came to the conclusion that Motorola should install one of its systems at ARRL HQ.
»www.arrl.org/news/stories/2005/08/29/1/
The Motorola system uses its Canopy wireless as a backbone. This does, of course, eliminate those overhead wires as antennas. It also offers the system immunity to radiated and conducted signals. While fully "wired" BPL needs repeaters every 2000 feet or less, the Canopy system, under line-of-site conditions, can go a few miles between hops, if needed.
They then couple onto LV secondary wiring (240 volt) into homes and businesses. They use HomePlug modems into the premises. By standard, HomePlug notches the ham bands.
»p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/rfi/HomePlug···ARRL.pdf
Motorola has added hardware filters to increase the depth of it notches.
Their design does have some interfernce potential to shortwave listening. At this time, the only solution to that would be for Motorola to go wireless all the way to that individual location, which it can do.
As an aside, other wired broadband services and devices such as HomePlug, the VDSL systems and the Home Phone Networking Alliance have all deviced standards to notch the ham bands. Although some in the BPL industry, such as Motorola, Current and IBEC have designs that completely avoid the Amateur bands, other companies such as Ambient and Amperion are literally leading the industry push not to have such standards for the BPL industry. Although even some of the other companies may be seeing some light at the end of the tunnel, as many of the entries into the FCC-mandated BPL database indicate that many Amperion and Mitsubishi systems are now also voluntarily notching the ham bands.
It is pretty evident that the companies that have designs that avoid most interference issues are the more successful in the marketplace -- Current in Cincinatti and Texas and IBEC in the rural areas. Frankly, the industry reluctance to address interference head on is one of the factors holding it back. They have an opportunity to do so through the IEEE standards process, but even there, their choice is specifically NOT to address compatibility with radio services in their standards in any way other than by specifying test methods.
Back to the point, though. The Motorola BPL system installed at ARRL HQ didn't use the electric utility wiring, but was installed on a wireless link from our HQ building to the W1AW station across the parking lot. A simulated "drop" wire was installed and the BPL system mounted on one of the W1AW towers. An example of how the station is configured is seen in some of the pictures at:
»www.arrl.org/news/stories/2004/06/21/1/
In general, the antennas are clustered all around the building.
When the Motorola system was fired up, Dick Illman and I monitored each of the ham bands in turn. We only heard their BPL signal on one band, just above the noise, on only one antenna, pointed right at the building. All other bands were clean. (A minor design change subsequently made by Motorola is expected to reduce the emissions level somewhat from that level.)
The W1AW station transmits simultaneously on seven Amateur bands, using 1000 or more watts for each transmitter. When the W1AW bulletins came on at 4 PM, the additional filtering in the Motorola system allowed it to continue to operate unimpeded, by the tests we did at the time.
All in all, the combination worked well from an EMC point of view. Motorola will have to sell itself in terms of reliability; speed and utility applications; ARRL can speak only to EMC issues.
What I find ironic is that some in the BPL industry have convinced themselves that Amateur Radio is a "dying breed" or that its "mere hobby" status should not offer it any protection. Read the following and decide for yourselves:
»p1k.arrl.org/~ehare/bpl/emcomm.html
»www.arrl.org/hamradio.html
Some have also convinced themselves that ARRL is anti-BPL and that what it says is politically driven. ARRL has worked closely with any BPL manufacturer willing to do so. Over the years, it has worked with the VDSL industry, the cable industry and groups like the Home Phone Networking Alliance on interference issues. In general, those companies that can address BPL interference are willing to do so; those whose designs cannot do so adqequately claim that the victim is to blame.
What is ironic is that, to date, the most successful BPL companies are building on the work done between ARRL and HomePlug. The most successful broadband industries are the ones that address their interference issues responsibly. I see no reason to think that this won't apply to this industry as well.
In an EDN article on BPL, I was quoted as saying that my goal is to help BPL be successful. By helping this industry address its EMC issues, I will be doing just that. The article is at:
»www.edn.com/article/CA6280032.ht···yid=2282
ARRL's BPL resource page is:
»www.arrl.org/bpl
It contains, among other things, a list of BPL articles done by the press that are NOT the quick press-release yay-rah articles. There is a lot of good reading there. The page also has links to Amateur-Radio articles, business-case studies (pro and con) and a list of the cities where BPL is deployed.
Ed Hare, W1RFI@arrl.org, ARRL Lab |
|
KB2PSM
join:2002-08-06
Long Beach, NY | reply to rf_engineer
Re: BPL just won't die: another vendor trying BPL
Man...what he said!
(can't say it any better!) |
|
