| reply to N3EVL
Re: Earthlink reaching for straws if depending on BPL "Recently BPL companies offered to "notch out" that part of the BPL signal that conflicts with ham broadcasts, but the controversy appears to be far from settled." Are you sure the current BPL will pollute your world? "Sorry excuse for broadband technology" Why? Seems there are successful trials under way. I'm without broadband and so are 100 or so of my neighbors... I'm looking for any hope in sight. The airwaves should be used for the common good, if this can give more people access to the internet in a shorter time wouldn't then the needs of the many out weigh the few? Can't you use IRC Chat to talk to your local HAM buddies? Could it be time for one technology to give way for a new one that serves more ? |
|
N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | reply to hayabusa3303
said by hayabusa3303:99.9% of the public dont care about it. They want internet. And sometimes Joe Public doesn't have the necessary information or technical background to make an informed decision on a subject. That's why we have the various national and international bodies that are supposed to make these kind of decisions on Joe Public's behalf and look at the pros and cons before doing something that is decidedly not in the public interest such as, in this case, throwing HF to the dogs. Unfortunately, the FCC has dropped the ball to a large extent on this issue by being (at least at the top of its echelons) overly supportive of this technology.
Incidentally, Amateur Radio utilizes only a small percentage of the HF spectrum that is affected. It would seem that this spectrum which you so readilly dismiss as unimportant should therefore be up for grabs to services such as Amateur Radio yet, that is certainly not the case. It may be that this spectrum is more highly valued by more entities than you or Joe Public is aware of. |
|
| reply to hayabusa3303
It interferes with a wide swath of spectrum up to 80Mhz. This is NOT just the Hams but Military, Public Safety and various other commercial users.
Now, you can notch out certain areas so BPL will not interfere with them BUT they will interfere with someone else. Also, considering the Hams use less than 4Mhz from 500khz to 30Mhz, BPL will still need a larger frequency range to operate at the speeds they want to compete at. Therefore, not only will Hams be interfered with, but other users. Even the FCC put out a rule saying that certain frequencies MUST be notched (mostly military) and that BPL installations mut NOT be within certain distances of military bases, maritime communications centers and various other places (long list.)
So, to say that the Hams are the only ones against this is not only extremely short-sighted but also shows your lack of understanding of the real situation.
If you are really interested in seeing what the problems are with this tech, do some research. It has been pointed out so many times, it should not be too hard to find. |
|
| reply to anonMe
said by anonMe:
"Recently BPL companies offered to "notch out" that part of the BPL signal that conflicts with ham broadcasts, but the controversy appears to be far from settled." Are you sure the current BPL will pollute your world? "Sorry excuse for broadband technology" Why? Seems there are successful trials under way. There might be a few supposedly "succesful" trials out there but many have failed. Reasons range from profitability to infrastructure but I doubt any would admit to interference.
said by anonMe:
I'm without broadband and so are 100 or so of my neighbors... I'm looking for any hope in sight. The airwaves should be used for the common good, if this can give more people access to the internet in a shorter time wouldn't then the needs of the many out weigh the few? Well, since the FCC just classified DSL as an "information" service, there is no special treatment for broadband access anymore.
As for the "common good" argument, I could make the argument that Ham Radio is used in emergency communications all the time and is able to work in many conditions from power outages to natural disasters. Also, "in before if the power is out, BPL won't intefere" argument. Doesn't matter if you can transmit, it's all about being able to receive.
said by anonMe:
Can't you use IRC Chat to talk to your local HAM buddies? Could it be time for one technology to give way for a new one that serves more ?
Again, this tired old argument. Ham Radio is usuable in many more places with a lot less infrastructure than is needed for internet access. |
|
N3EVL
join:2004-12-13
Shrewsbury, MA | reply to anonMe
There is significant evidence (reported on and discussed in this forum many times) that indicates that certain BPL implementations behave very badly in terms of radiating signal at HF to the extent that significant disruption to communications occurs; communications that could otherwise be conducted normally.
The Corridor Systems implementation is the least likely to cause problems because it operates at microwave.
I believe the Cinergy solution is moderately successful since it operates above 30MHz but still presents the possibility of interference to low VHF and (as far as I know) is capable of extending into HF.
The other implementations that are still true BPL use portions of HF below 30MHz and are bad players.
Please factor into your thinking that BPL's intention is to send the signal down the _powerline_; that fact that it radiates interference is purely coincidental! Those of us that object to the badly behaved implementations of this technology only ask that it be held to the same standards as competing technologies and that those standards are enforced.
I see no reason why BPL and all its warts should be given carte blanche to trash HF, especially in light of the coincidental nature of that pollution as mentioned above. To allow it to do so is patently absurd, regardless of the public's demand for broadband connectivity.
HF is the ONLY section of the spectrum that has the unique characteristics that make low-infrastructure global communications possible. If you think that is something that deserves to be discarded as a byproduct of BPL then I would have to respectfully disagree with you. |
|
 Radio ActiveMy pappy's a pistolPremium
join:2003-01-31
Fullerton, CA | reply to hayabusa3303
said by hayabusa3303:Ok tell me then mister know it all then. explain it to me then. This topic has been discussed ad infinitum since before you joined BBR.
Just look up any of rf_engineer's posts; they will more than fully explain the train wreck that BPL really is.
--
Q: What is- More powerful than God; More evil than Satan; rich people want it and poor people have it; If you eat it you will die? A: Nothing.»www.folsomtech.com |
|
| reply to hrobins
you and ruffer need to get together.
One says it hasnt been tested and one says it has been so someone doesnt know what they are talking about here. |
|
|
|
| reply to hayabusa3303
Re: Earthlink reaching for straws if depending on No, it's not the ham radio guys that are the problem. Hobbyists don't have a lot of money, so they're not going to put up much of a fight.
The problem is that BPL is a white elephant. It takes a shitload of money to make it happen, and the only place you can make any money are places where DSL and cable are already entrenched. WORSE is the fact that when you're out of bandwidth on a BPL system, you're done. You can't simply lay in more cable because that's why you're on BPL in the first place - to avoid laying more wire or fiber.
If BPL happens, you'll get about the same speeds as ISDN by the time it's deployed and operating. Nothing to write home about. |
|
| reply to hayabusa3303
Re: Earthlink reaching for straws if depending on BPL quote:
Bpl works. Its the ham radio guys that are the hold up. They are the ones complaining. I havnt heard any other bad thing about except that.
Go harrass the bells to put FTTH. Don't get short changed with BPL junk technology. |
|
| reply to liquidnw
said by liquidnw:I disagree i dont think BPL isn't a niche tech. People really don't care how they get the net in the home whether it is fiber, coax, DSL or wireless as long as it works and its at a good price. If earthlink can offer this a a competitive price I think they can compete especially since their customer service is light years ahead of all the cable and phone companies. "Works and its a good price" is the operative statement in that paragraph. BPL is a mixed bag of sorts that is unpredictable. We've seen unloaded pilot systems that scream. I know of one person that loves using it and he's a ham radio operator. Some carriers find it uneconomical and unable to scale with bandwidth needs. Some systems like Cinergy voluntarily stay out of amateur radio bands and succeed. Others are in violation of Part 15 emissions rules right now and continue to take their chances or are just unaware of their system's characteristics.
I think what the BPL industry needs now is a clean-out. Equipment vendors that have records of interference or use primitive technology need to get weeded out. There needs to be one standard, not several. There needs to be realistic promises for speeds for mature, heavily loaded systems; not a facade that this is a contender against fiber. The industry needs to make an across-the-board acknowledgement that BPL emissions need to be limited to above 30 Mhz and that they are a wired network that can severely interfere with wireless communications, not demand the rights of a wireless spectrum license holder. Until then, BPL will continue to be a technologically problematic niche player serving only as pilot and press release material and contributing little if anything to the bottom line. |
|
Reviews:
 ·RoadRunner Cable
 ·AT&T Southeast
| just the person i have waited on.
What kind of system does the Cinergy system have?
Going to stab myself in the foot here with my other thread but why does he (ham operator) like it or did you ask him?
We have talked about this before if you remember me..:D:D |
|
| said by hayabusa3303:just the person i have waited on. What kind of system does the Cinergy system have?
Current Communications. It's Homeplug based and they are rumored to stay above 30 Mhz.
Going to stab myself in the foot here with my other thread but why does he (ham operator) like it or did you ask him?
He liked it because the speeds were reasonable and it didn't interfere with the bands he was using. Three miles down the road from his house, I found a BPL emission from overhead lines on the lower end of the 7 Mhz band that blew the doors off my truck. His neighborhood was using underground wires. Perhaps he used only the upper end of the 7 Mhz band. His transmissions didn't affect the system, but I know of a test done in another area that dropped connections. I know of two other hams in the area that were affected by interference. There are some areas where BPL is blanketing multiple bands and other areas where you can barely hear it. It's hit or miss. This seems to be the story with BPL in general. IMO, because it is still deployed in small pockets, sloppy systems can get away without complaints. If some of these systems were deployed widespread like cable and dsl, the utility would be run ragged trying to tweak them to avoid interference complaints. Cable, DSL, fiber, and wireless just pretty much work. From what I've gathered from folks involved in some trials, BPL is a labor-intensive to deploy and requires a lot of tweaking.
To answer your other post about ham radio operators holding it up, that is hardly the case. I think what you're seeing is a combination of utilities that move slowly and are hesitant to make revolutionary decisions and a group of equipment vendors that are still feeling their way around with this technology. If you read through the volumes of FCC filings from BPL vendors and carriers, most have dismissed ham radio interference complaints as an issue. If BPL were truly the panacea it is claimed to be, Amateur radio and the other 90% of HF radio spectrum users would probably be trampled.
Also, it's my understanding that Motorola consulted with Amateur Radio operators when designing their system. Motorola decided not to use BPL on the medium voltage lines, and instead use wireless as the backbone medium. BPL is used on the low voltage lines into the home. This makes more sense as low voltage lines are twisted and closely spaced and will radiate less. Motorola is putting hard frequency notches in their system. Others do software based notches which can be very sloppy and cause emissions near filter edges.
So, don't blame ham radio for BPL's lack of progress. There have been trials going on since 1997. Could they make a BPL system that would never interfere with HF radio spectrum and scale? Yes. Would it be cost effective? The jury is still out on that. Will it be cost effective, less problematic, and widely deployable before cable, DSL, and fiber is everywhere? I doubt it.
As others have said, Earthlink's move is no surprise. With the FCC's recent brilliant "let's help broadband by squashing competition" move, and Earthlink's simmering interest in Ambient, it's only natural that they'll try to play one of the few cards they have. Google invested in BPL recently as well. BPL is an attractive 1990's .com boom style investment. We all saw where that went. The Earthlinks and Googles should be looking at wireless investments. Despite the short-term costs, power companies should be running fiber. BPL is not suitable as a long term high speed backbone solution. |
|
| Thank you for the answers i have been looking for all along.
I was hoping you where on earlier today when i started this but, its fine i got my answers from you and thats what i was wanting.
thanks again
busa
|
|
| reply to rf_engineer
rf_engineer, no rumors about HomePlug please. The facts...
The HomePlug PHY occupies the band from about 4.5 to 21 MHz.
Hams like it because...
The PHY includes reduced transmitter power spectral density in the amateur radio bands to minimize the risk of radiated energy from the power line interfering with these systems.
To learn more read »www.commsdesign.com/main/2000/12···eat5.htm |
|
