| reply to ctceo
Re: See... said by ctceo:
As stated before the test results are property of the utility company requiring our service, and the FCC agent in charge of interference monitoring. Should they decide to make this info public, you will know.
I'd like to see the results but it doesn't really matter. It's merely consist with the BPL industry's secrecy and lack of publicly available measurement information. "The truth will set you free" applies here, and the industry doesn't want to publish the truth.
quote:
Rest assured that it is causing no problems that can't be handled with a few insulator repairs, and coupler rerouting schemes to prevent feedback through, or rather around the insulated circuit.
Insulator repairs fix anomalies which cause arcing and intermodulation, but it doesn't address the issue of the conductors inherently acting like antennas. And please elaborate on the feedback issue. That's a new one for me.
quote:
And why is it that the only documents the ARRL can come up with about "Interference Related" problems are in countries where the wiring is tired and broken, and just about every insulator has failed??? Simple answer, Because it causes problems there we must stop it before it causes problems here. Why, who knows, maybe it's because they think they own frequency allotments.
No one owns frequency allocations, but Part 97 gives us privleges there. Your BPL is operating under Part 15 which we've talked about ad nausem -- BPL is using the weakest part of Title 47 to exist.
The reason why there is so much documentation on interference related problems in other countries is because BPL has been pushed and trialed in these areas long before it hit the US. If the whole interference issue came down to insulators, we wouldn't be having this conversation. It would be in production in numerous countries and generating revenue. But it's not.
quote:
I was able to re-create the sounds from the ARRL video simply by placing an old AM radio, Power Inverter, or a Static Filled Blanket within a foot or two from my YAESU FT-847. The video proves Nothing. The simple fact that the FCC has seen the results, and the actual product in service is operating well under allowable limits in it's "test" (and soon to be official) "beds".
I can create RFI with numerous devices too, but that has absolutely nothing to do with BPL. The video shows S9 signals emanating from BPL test sites. The ARRL even worked with a subscriber at the Emmaus site to clearly link BPL data transfer to the signals observed on the HF bands. If you're implying the ARRL tests were rigged, that's a whole different matter and you don't have anything to back that up.
quote:
Look forward to seeing it in your rural community in 3-5 years, if not sooner.
I already have Cable modem service in my rural community, thank you. They've scooped up all the potential subscribers and just increased their downstream customer bandwidth to 3 Mbs. It's been in service for something like four years, it works, and it doesn't go down when I transmit on my station. I enjoy cruising the Internet while I'm operating my station...something I'll never do with BPL due to ingress interference. |
