ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
clubs:
 ·magicjack.com
 ·AT&T U-Verse
 ·Comcast
 ·AT&T Midwest
 ·HughesNet Satellit..
1 edit | reply to BigCreek
Re: I'm always amazed ...
They have already begun to work on resolutions. Within the next few weeks to months a new plan to tackle the interference, will be put in place, and the project will start again. What I have not seen was proof that interference actually existed, so I'm with BigCreek on this one, Theres really no reason to happy dance over a minor stall in the inevitable rollout of a well needed product.
Feel free to post videotaped proof taken from that specific test bed, otherwise the case is closed, and the project will get the green light once again, and the legal tables will have turned because there will be no evidence to support the contrary in any FCC hearing. |
|
moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| said by ctceo  :
Within the next few weeks to months a new plan to tackle the "alleged" interference, will be put in place, and the project will start again. What I have not seen was proof that interference actually existed,
Alleged interference? Even Alliant says there was interference:
quote:
Alliant Energy, in conjunction with concerned engineers, tried several approaches to reduce interference, including notching out or "power masking" the HF amateur bands, which the vendor claims is "labor intensive". Opponents argued the company should have interference sorted out before any type of trial was attempted, particularly since BPL emissions in some instances have had an impact on emergency communications.
Seems like a lot of work for something that doesn't exists.  |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to ctceo
said by ctceo :
They have already begun to work on resolutions. Within the next few weeks to months a new plan to tackle the interference, will be put in place, and the project will start again. What I have not seen was proof that interference actually existed, so I'm with BigCreek on this one, Theres really no reason to happy dance over a minor stall in the inevitable rollout of a well needed product.
Feel free to post videotaped proof taken from that specific test bed, otherwise the case is closed, and the project will get the green light once again, and the legal tables will have turned because there will be no evidence to support the contrary in any FCC hearing.
Here's an FCC filing with measurements »gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retr···16214274 . As moonpuppy has mentioned, even Alliant admitted there was interference and was actively working on it. Technicians noted the notching was a "labor intensive" process.
{late night humor} Were you on the OJ jury? |
|
Nighttime
join:2001-11-30
| Very intersting reading.  Did I read something about they were doing something different that what they told the FCC? If so it should have been canceled period.
Its a failed concept. If you look at the formulas and theory behind a wire antenna and compare it to BPL. Even a poor EE would agree it makes no sense and they cant support their argument about how it works.
It would be nice to have a way for rural areas to have decent broadband but this wont work and is an empty promess that it can never fufill. |
|
ctceo
Premium
join:2001-04-26
South Bend, IN
clubs:
·magicjack.com
·AT&T U-Verse
·Comcast
·AT&T Midwest
·HughesNet Satellit..
| reply to rf_engineer
Interesting read.
I stand corrected. This does not mean that they will just up and can the whole project, as I stated before the project will resume at the right time. It just so happens that this was an ideal case in that the test bed happened to be surrounding the station claiming interference. I do not see this as any reason to cease all BPL trials and active areas.
--
ASUS SK8N nForce3 - 8GB PC2700 - AXP 64 3400+ - nVidia 6800 Ultra w/512mb - CL Audigy 2 PP - WD SATA150 36GB + Hitachi GST 250GB - Plextor PX708A + Sony CRX300A - Dual 600 Watt PSU's. |
|
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Time Warner Cable
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | reply to rf_engineer
Question: Are you aware of any ingress protection schema designed into BPL?
Hams and CBers with high-power transmitters might almost assuredly disrupt BPL connectivity. (I am both, although I have no high power equipment)
Any thoughts?
--
"Maybe" is twice as good as "No", but only half as good as "Yes"... »www.folsomtech.com |
|
