Manassas BPL: 300Kbps, $29/Month > that...sucks!

that...sucks!

No no no ... you're conversions are all wrong

300kbit = 37.5KB
3000kbit = 375KB

real world after overhead, you're 300kbit will be more like 250kbit ( 31.25KB/s ) and 3000kbit will be more like 2500kbit ( 312KB/s ).

reply to rawgerz
when you convert from bits to bytes you divide by 8 not 10

Well if BPL is deployed.. say goodbye to radio.

Please note i'm not a cospiricy thearist just stating facts.

Doesn't it seem like what BPL will do is
1)invade your privacy
2)f k up radio
3)possibly (this COULD happen) mess you up and your computer

Remember your dealing with sending data via electricity. NOT a good mix.

Heres some articles about BPL you should read before saying "ohh boy broadband in rural areas!"

»www.vonmag.com/issue/2005/jan/fe···ines.htm

»vvara.org/broadband_bpl.html

»www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,a···5,00.asp

and one note.. (I can't find this article but..) a ham did some testing and when he keyed his rig the BPL went DEAD.

Do some research and you will decide that BPL is bad for you bad for radio (and especially in emergencies)

Write to congress and tell them you DONT want BPL but you do want to see existing technologies spread out to the most rural area in the US an Canada.

Rob
--
»www.robfwb.com

reply to barky
i know but it was just an estimate showing the major difference between bits and bytes!
same principal for GB's on drives
--
Read this!

reply to Rob850
looks like they are making it better with new hardware, higher speeds and getting rid of the so-called interference issues, I have not seen complaints for a few months now, must mean they have tweaked the freqs so it is clean now. This will be another choice in the future people will just have to deal with more choices, DSL/BPL/Cable/WI-FI, so many choices prices will drop and we the people will win, I feel sorry for the idiots that are getting ripped off for muni ran crap.

He will never answer that. After all when he reads the hype the pro BPL companies put out, he will believe that and not the ones who have pioneered most of these technologies. Well I have my normal spectrums done in the Colorado front range area, so if BPL even comes to this area I can do the old A vs. B test and show the power companies they are creating 20-30db more noise floor than before. I don't think they will be able to argue with cold hard data.
If that fails, the introduction of Mr. Kilowatt on 14Mhz with a high gain horizontal antenna will wake them up for sure. CQ CQ CQ de W2CO pse K

reply to N3EVL
yeah I will answer that, read the article, understand what is said....""Not all [BPL] equipment is created equal," says ComTek President and CEO Joe Fergus. For instance, ComTek installs BPL equipment from Main.net Communications Ltd., an Israel-based BPL equipment manufacturer whose gear is "among the most stable in the industry," he says. "

As for " the lines still radiate" they have always radiated, it still is common to drive under high voltage power lines and lose a FM radio station. Even simple wiring "radiates" all of them do.

I think there is a work around to the interference issue with hams, instead of trying to kill BPL maybe they should be helping by working out ways to eliminate the interference. With the FCC mandating certain freqs "off limits" what is the issue now? Some people just complain to complain.

The only reason I even support this is the money. BPL will be muni, at $500,000 it is a lot cheaper on the tax payers than running pure fiber to the whole city. This is not a fix all and is not the golden egg, but it is a viable option that should be explored. A few gens down the line and it will work fine.

So are you saying ComTek's equipment does NOT use the 2 - 80 MHz spectrum? Or perhaps they have some novel way to prevent the lines radiating the signal - please, educate me. I could care less how "stable" their hardware is - just tell me if it does or doesn't radiate and if not, how not?

The ONLY equipment that I have heard of that stands a chance of being able to coexist with licensed spectrum users it the Corridor Systems hardware that does NOT use HF.

It has been pointed out many times on this forum that the noise radiated by powerlines while they are performing the purpose for which they were designed and the type of interfering signals radiated by powerlines carrying BPL at HF are completely different. Please do your homework.

Please describe the work-around. If you are refering to the notching technique already mentioned, its shortcomings have already been well documented and in any event this just increases the burden placed upon those other HF spectrum users that have not been included in the notch. As much as I value my access to the 10% or so of the HF spectrum allocated to ham radio, I do not consider notching a valid work-around if it (BPL) continues to cause interference to other spectrum users.

Why is BPL a viable option? Just because it showed up the day the FCC were looking for a quick fix? Let's see, we've already got Cable, DSL, and various flavors of wireless and I don't deny that other potential solutions would be welcome additions to the mix, provided they are well engineered solutions. BPL does not fall into that category and should be rejected on that basis. I'll be the first to cheer when a viable option appears but I see no need to validate BPL just because it is available.

reply to justncredible
"After all when he reads the hype the pro BPL companies put out, he will believe that"
I said that for a reason, you read this crap :
....""Not all [BPL] equipment is created equal," from some pro raghead CEO. Of course they will say these things, do you think they will tell you anything negative about that company ???
That's exactly what I'm talking about, you really know nothing about the HF spectrum and the fact that BPL is and will remain a Part15 device. And that says that if harmful interference is caused by BPL to Licensed services, it must cease and decist immediately! And also that any harmful interference to BPL caused by Licensed services cannot be remedied. This alone would say that BPL is doomed from the start and these rules have not been changed.
This crappy technology has already been tested in quite a few countries and either banned altogether or shelved because of monitary or interference issues. This will never change because the laws of physics cannot and will not change for a bunch of raghead no nothings trying to make a buck and ruining a great natural resource in the process.
It just aint gonna happen.

I can't remember, but wasn't there somthing on making any type of broadband a public utility, and then also removing the Part 15 rule off of broadband.

IF they really had problems with the equipment interfering with miltary, government radio; then there is no way they would be even letting places like Manasas set it up. It is really only the HAM radio operators that are complaining.

Anyway, I see it still needs a way to go to become a more mainstream appilcation, but right now it is just a cheap fix to being able to offer broadband to more people at a cheap price, EVENTUALLY.

reply to justncredible
"I think there is a work around to the interference issue with hams, instead of trying to kill BPL maybe they should be helping by working out ways to eliminate the interference. With the FCC mandating certain freqs "off limits" what is the issue now? ""

The issue now is the same one that existed in the beginning,
Open wires with an HF signal applied to them will radiate.
There's no work around to this fact. The only way to make BPL not radiate would be to use coaxial cable with extra shielding to ground. And guess what? That already exists and with 3Mbps - it's called cable. The cable companies take great care in keeping their signals enclosed in good coax cable with good quality connectors. If any leaks are detected they are right out there fixing it. Now this crappy technology comes along and they think they can trash everything else just to have 300kbps and a few bucks? The FCC banned a few segments of the HF spectrum from BPL because these frequencies are used for crypto government communications, and military, and CIA. This only means that BPL will lose bandwidth and when the others complain it will loose even more bandwidth until when? No Bandwidth - or the guy down the street on 27Mhz keys up his 500W amplifier then what will you do? Now hams are federally licensed to use much more power than that and legally, CBers are not but they still do regularly.
Both of these represent less than 12% of the total HF spectrum. What about all the other users in between? Are they to just accept the interference and say Oh Well?
I don't think so...

reply to Luker3
If the Part 15 status of BPL is subject to change, I haven't heard about it - what would it end up being classified as? Do you have any further info on this? In any event, BPL systems will still be just as prone to experiencing interference from incoming still-legal signals such as legitimatly tranmitted by hams and no legal wording can help with that.

The evidence to date on the FCC's handling of the whole BPL affair (fiasco?) leaves me (and I suspect many others that follow this subject closely) to conclude that they have let places like Manassas set it up DESPITE overwhelming technical evidence of BPL's inability to play nicely in the RF neighborhood. I do not share your confidence in their judgement in this matter. The techology has only got as far as it has due to the ill-advised, premature support given by the FCC and pressure from the current administration to appear to be filling the alleged void of lack of available broadband options. So along comes BPL with its vocal proponents and a gullible FCC swallows the hype, does not do due dilligence, ultimately fails to listen to its own technical staff and (I suspect) is now too embarrassed or unwilling to admit they made a mistake. The only good news is that enough concerned people are watching every move made by the FCC and the BPL proponents so they can't expect those affected by its downside to just turn aside and let them do their spectrum-polluting thing in a vacuum.

reply to w2co

Range...

2000 feet between repeaters that have to be on the poles...

so really this is a horribly designed system that is doomed to fail
--
BellSouth sucks

reply to justncredible

Re: that...sucks!