Electro-High SpeedBPL technology coming soon? ( old news - 02:18PM Friday Feb 13 2004) tags: fcc · alternatives · bandwidthLost among the hooplah concerning the FCC's VoIP decision yesterday was the fact the agency green-lighted controversial broadband via-powerline technology. FCC head Michael Powell says the technology has the potential to be "the great broadband hope for a good part of rural America". The agency, to the dismay of military, emergency, and hobbyist radio operators, did not reduce the permissible emission interference limits under Part 15 guidelines. Instead, the FCC will rely on providers applying "adaptive interference mitigation techniques" in regions impacted by interference (FCC press releases and commissioner comments available at the FCC website). Naturally the American Radio Relay League (ARRL), a group representing radio hobbyists that has been vocal on the issue, was less than enthused. "I had hoped the FCC would have shown a greater depth of understanding of the issue," opines League President Jim Haynie. Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein played the middle. "We need to be mindful of harmful interference, but we can’t let unsupported claims stand in the way of this kind of innovation." The word "innovation" could likely be replaced with the word "profit" by many critics. BPL's "unsupported" noise, tracked by the ARRL and others, has often proved to be 10,000 times higher than acceptable levels in some world-wide trials. In some cases the interference has been enough to disable 20-meter monobanders on high-rise buildings, or - in one case in Austria - disable Red Cross communications during an emergency disaster response drill. While a third major player in the broadband industry would likely benefit consumers, there is little doubt further study is needed before BPL sees mainstream adoption. Perhaps having a grumpy day, FCC Commissioner Copps (who was the lone dissenter in yesterday's VoIP ruling as well) was the only FCC member to voice serious concerns about the technology, arguing the FCC was "dodging" some of the harder questions about the technology. "Is it right to allow electric ratepayers to pay higher bills every month to subsidize an electric company’s foray into broadband?" Copps asked. The technology now moves on to the next phase, a Notice of Proposed Rule Making (NPRM), which will include further testing of the technology. After the NPRM, the technology will shift from scattered trials to broad scale adoption and your electrical outlet.
Related:- Hams Want FCC To Actually Study BPL Before Praising It
- FCC Denies M2Z's Free Broadband Plan
- Motorola Offers White Space Device For Testing
- FCC Begins Field Testing Of Prototype 'White Space' Broadband
- Google Voice Ban Is Clear Network Neutrality Violation
- What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
- Comcast Launches Wireless Broadband In Philly
- Verizon: Droid Tethering Will Cost $30 Extra
|
 
Stewy85
Premium
join:2003-01-16
Sharon, WI
clubs: | Good WOOHOO! Maybe we can get cheap broadband now.
--
0111010001110010011101010111010001101000 | |
|  | Gandalf4503
join:2002-06-27
Las Vegas, NV | Re: Good This isn't good. It's going to suck in the long run. | |
| | | 
God
IN Vilseck Germany
Premium
join:2002-07-01
Colorado Springs, CO
clubs: | Re: Good suck it ham radio people .. welcome to the 21'st century .. | |
| | | | 
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA | Re: Good We've been here for years, what have you been doing? | |
| | | | | | | | | 
GoodBuddy
@168.143.x.x
| Re: Good As a former CB radio operator who always resented the arrogant, nose-high-in-the-air attitude that the local hams displayed toward us (despite the fact that most of us were running legal rigs), we do know the tricks to shut down guys like you. Unless you have an eight foot high chain link fence with razor wire on the top and trained dobermans inside, don't count on the fact that you'll be able to mess up our Internet connections for very long.
You guys are an anachronism anyway - you get your jollies by saying you provide emergency communications, and sure, the authorities will use you in a pinch because you'll work for free and are eager for any excuse to prove that your hobby isn't just an expensive toy. But you've used your infernal Morse code to keep people out of your little playhouse for so long that a lot of the rest of us wish you'd just pack it up and find another hobby, so we can go back to watching TV and using our radios and telephones without interference from you morons. I know the complaints we used to get from neighbors when operating only five watt rigs; I can just imagine how your neighbors must feel about you pumping out 500 or 1000 watts.
The emergency people all have their own two-way equipment and we also have a large network of cellular towers. Relatively few disasters bring down both wireline and cellular communications; for those the National Guard could be called in, but of course they don't work for free. But for one real need ever 20 years or so, I think we could manage to pay them for a day or two.
The biggest laugh I ever got was the day I found out some of your two-meter frequencies had been taken away and given to United Parcel. Guess it proves you guys really don't have your way with the FCC. And, I know that real-time tracking of UPS packages has been of far more benefit to me than the existence of ham radio ever has.
Anyway, you start screwing up people's broadband and you'd better find a source of coax cable in bulk, because you're probably going to need it. Pins and wire cutters are a lot cheaper than coax. Of course, you could go with the trained dobermans, but then there's all that dog food to buy, and besides, they might enjoy chewing wires themselves! | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | 
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
1 edit | said by GoodBuddy:
As a former CB radio operator who always resented the arrogant, nose-high-in-the-air attitude that the local hams displayed toward us (despite the fact that most of us were running legal rigs), we do know the tricks to shut down guys like you. Unless you have an eight foot high chain link fence with razor wire on the top and trained dobermans inside, don't count on the fact that you'll be able to mess up our Internet connections for very long
You guys are an anachronism anyway - you get your jollies by saying you provide emergency communications, and sure, the authorities will use you in a pinch because you'll work for free and are eager for any excuse to prove that your hobby isn't just an expensive toy. But you've used your infernal Morse code to keep people out of your little playhouse for so long that a lot of the rest of us wish you'd just pack it up and find another hobby, so we can go back to watching TV and using our radios and telephones without interference from you morons. I know the complaints we used to get from neighbors when operating only five watt rigs; I can just imagine how your neighbors must feel about you pumping out 500 or 1000 watts.
A lot of Hams have gotten their start in CB. Unfortunately CB is very limited as a communications tool. The FCC lost control of it in the 1970s making it what it is today. Now it's a free-for-all with no station identification and inter-user interference galore. FCC hands-off action at its finest.
The problem with CB and interference stems largely from illegal amplifiers. Amplifiers aren't inherently a bad thing, but mix it with an unlicensed service, little or no technical expertise, lousy cheap designs, and AM modulation and you have a recipe for disaster.
I'm not going to get into a Morse code debate, but it's easy to see your animosity against Amateur Radio. You probably weren't willing to train yourself and get licensed. ( Morse code requirements, BTW, have been reduced considerably in recent years. )
I know plenty of Amateurs that operate 1 kW stations and live harmoniously with their neighbors. That's the key to the Amateur Radio service, training and technical expertise. You talk with your neighbors and work to fix the interference. Most CBers that acquired the technical experience and had the motivation to learn and fix problems moved on to Amateur Radio. This isn't meant to be snobbish, but it's the truth.
quote:
The emergency people all have their own two-way equipment and we also have a large network of cellular towers. Relatively few disasters bring down both wireline and cellular communications; for those the National Guard could be called in, but of course they don't work for free. But for one real need ever 20 years or so, I think we could manage to pay them for a day or two.
Cellular networks today depend heavily on wired facilities to interconnect sites, so their value in extreme disasters has gone down significantly.
Emergency Amateur communications isn't meant to be a replace first responder communications, it augments it. Much of the traffic out of a disaster area is simple "I'm OK" messages to family members. Such traffic doesn't need to be clogging up other communications channels.
quote:
The biggest laugh I ever got was the day I found out some of your two-meter frequencies had been taken away and given to United Parcel. Guess it proves you guys really don't have your way with the FCC. And, I know that real-time tracking of UPS packages has been of far more benefit to me than the existence of ham radio ever has.
Get your facts straight. It was 220 Mhz, not 2 meters, and Amateurs had a secondary allocation there, not primary. Such is life when one has a secondary allocation. BPL doesn't even have a secondary allocation, it's operating unlicensed under Part 15, the weakest regulatory footing one can have.
Ironically, UPS never developed the system they proposed. Your real time package tracking isn't on 220 Mhz. They ended up using CDPD (I know, I worked at a carrier implementing it). The FCC was duped by a commercial interest. Sound familiar?
quote:
Anyway, you start screwing up people's broadband and you'd better find a source of coax cable in bulk, because you're probably going to need it. Pins and wire cutters are a lot cheaper than coax. Of course, you could go with the trained dobermans, but then there's all that dog food to buy, and besides, they might enjoy chewing wires themselves!
Are you encouraging vandalism, a crime and a Federal one to boot as you're vandalizing a Federally-licensed station? | |
| | | | | | |
GoodBuddy
@168.143.x.x
| Re: Good So I got 2 meters and 220 MHz confused. So UPS never developed the system. Big deal, it still proved to hams that they did not run the FCC.
As for encouraging vandalism, a Federal crime, etc. etc. I somehow doubt the FBI is going to come out and investigate a coax pinning, especially if you brought it upon yourself by deliberately interfering with other people's broadband communication. I don't have to encourage such a thing, I'm just telling you that you don't want a bunch of pissed-off teenagers upset with you because you're deliberately ruining their online experience, especially if they figure out you're doing it just to be spiteful because you hate giving up any frequencies.
You hams have a whole lot of bandwidth to play with already, why do you so begrudge others use of the bandwidth, especially for unlicensed applications? That bandwidth should belong to everyone, not just those willing to join your cult and play by the rules that the old farts at the ARRL insist on hanging onto. Yes, code is finally going away but only because the so many of the old brass pounders who lobbied the FCC to keep the code requirement have finally gone on to that great ham shack in the sky. The code requirement should have been dropped forty years ago.
And for the record: Yes, I am one of those who refused to study an antiquated form of communication just so I could hook up with a group of radio snobs. And no, I never either had my cable damaged, nor did I ever damage anyone else's equipment. But I know it happened, and it usually happened to people who thought they were the king of the airwaves and that nobody could touch them. And believe me when I say that hams weren't totally above doing a little vandalism toward other hams from time to time.
Now I fully agree with the comments about the CB'ers who pump out illegal power with harmonics all over the spectrum. But let's not play Pollyanna here and act like there's never been a ham who was totally unconcerned about how he was messing up his neighbor's TV reception. You probably wouldn't know about that because the neighbors probably wouldn't write the ARRL and tell them. But let's not pretend that ham radio doesn't have its share of bad apples (some of whom aren't even former CB'ers).
Perhaps my message was a bit more provocative than it needed to be but I think it is high time that hams realized that the radio spectrum is a public resource. For too long hams have treated it like a "members only" beach, when in fact the beach belongs to all the taxpayers. In my opinion, power line broadband will benefit far more people than ham radio ever did or ever will. And what I was really reacting to was the implication that hams would deliberately go out of their way to disrupt the broadband connections of their neighbors just to prove a point, when they could just as easily move their operations to another part of the spectrum. So whatever names I have been called really should be attached to those hams who intend to squat on frequencies to deliberately disrupt broadband, just because they think they can. At least until the neighborhood teenagers figure out what's going on, that is. | |
| | | | | | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
1 edit | Re: Good said by GoodBuddy:
So I got 2 meters and 220 MHz confused. So UPS never developed the system. Big deal, it still proved to hams that they did not run the FCC.
OK, so corporate lobbyists run the FCC these days. Power to the people!....errrr... who wins ?
quote:
As for encouraging vandalism, a Federal crime, etc. etc. I somehow doubt the FBI is going to come out and investigate a coax pinning, especially if you brought it upon yourself by deliberately interfering with other people's broadband communication.
You're out of your mind. I suppose you also consider it OK to start shooting at your neighbors when they have loud parties. I wouldn't condone deliberate inteference, but what's your criteria to consider it deliberate? Merely operating and using the spectrum you're licensed for.
Bottom line, it's a Federal offense, deal with it. The FBI may not be there, but you're in a different ballgame than a shoplifter at your local supermarket. I don't understand why someone would want to risk their freedom for the next decade of their life over some broadband issues, or why someone would encourage it. Perhaps we should coin a new term called broadband rage?
quote:
I don't have to encourage such a thing, I'm just telling you that you don't want a bunch of pissed-off teenagers upset with you because you're deliberately ruining their online experience, especially if they figure out you're doing it just to be spiteful because you hate giving up any frequencies.
We've joked about online gamers and pr0n surfers being BPL's primary customers, but this is the first time I've actually seen someone seriously suggest that teens are a primary demographic.
Since you put it that way, I guess 5000 comment filers and various communications organizations better back down. We don't want pissed off teens rioting in the streets 
quote:
You hams have a whole lot of bandwidth to play with already, why do you so begrudge others use of the bandwidth, especially for unlicensed applications? That bandwidth should belong to everyone, not just those willing to join your cult and play by the rules that the old farts at the ARRL insist on hanging onto.
I don't get your position. You have over 300 Mhz of available spectrum with less stringent emissions requirements in the ISM and UNII bands, where Part 15 applications were meant to be and thrive. You can legally radiate something like 4 watts in these bands and it's over 10 times the amount of bandwidth you have available in HF. Also, you can use HF frequencies simply by taking a test. How more public can you get? If you give it to BPL interests, the utilities own them, not you.
quote:
The code requirement should have been dropped forty years ago.
I won't disagree with your basic premise on this (not that old timers died), but realize there were still international requirements for code up until about a year or two ago.
quote:
And for the record: Yes, I am one of those who refused to study an antiquated form of communication just so I could hook up with a group of radio snobs. And no, I never either had my cable damaged, nor did I ever damage anyone else's equipment. But I know it happened, and it usually happened to people who thought they were the king of the airwaves and that nobody could touch them. And believe me when I say that hams weren't totally above doing a little vandalism toward other hams from time to time.
Your loss. But the only attitudes like you describe I hear on CB. People with bad amps, overmodulation, and echo boxes stepping all over each other.
quote:
Now I fully agree with the comments about the CB'ers who pump out illegal power with harmonics all over the spectrum. But let's not play Pollyanna here and act like there's never been a ham who was totally unconcerned about how he was messing up his neighbor's TV reception. You probably wouldn't know about that because the neighbors probably wouldn't write the ARRL and tell them. But let's not pretend that ham radio doesn't have its share of bad apples (some of whom aren't even former CB'ers).
There's bad apples in Ham Radio, just like any other thing. But try to have an hour long conversation with someone on CB, not get interfered with, and actually get the other guy's real name and location. It's obvious you've rarely if ever listened to Amateur Radio.
quote:
Perhaps my message was a bit more provocative than it needed to be but I think it is high time that hams realized that the radio spectrum is a public resource. For too long hams have treated it like a "members only" beach, when in fact the beach belongs to all the taxpayers. In my opinion, power line broadband will benefit far more people than ham radio ever did or ever will. And what I was really reacting to was the implication that hams would deliberately go out of their way to disrupt the broadband connections of their neighbors just to prove a point, when they could just as easily move their operations to another part of the spectrum. So whatever names I have been called really should be attached to those hams who intend to squat on frequencies to deliberately disrupt broadband, just because they think they can. At least until the neighborhood teenagers figure out what's going on, that is.
But Amateur Radio is a public resource. You don't have to win an auction or buy a license from an incumbent licensee. Part 15 users just can't run rampant all over spectrum. You just don't get it. But it's obvious that you don't feel any rules should apply to you, whether it's physical destruction of equipment or spectrum legislation.
And oh no, here comes Carson Daly and the whole teenage audience of MTV TRL to shut us down! Throw the switch! Pull the plug! Run for your lives!
Your arguments aren't based in reality. Instead of defending the technology, you attack Amateur Radio. I fully hope you attack FEMA, the military, shortwave broadcasters, intercontinental airline pilots, ship radio operators, the Coast Guard, and other snobbish HF users who so ruthlessly deny you the right to use the airwaves. | |
| | | | | | | | 
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
 ·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | GoodBuddy, I'd like to respond to your last post, but allow me first to gracefully back peddle on the "name calling" I did earlier...I'm sorry.
That said, here we go.
Hams never thought we owned the FCC. Indeed, the FCC have made some rulings in the favor of hams and some against, so that proves only that they have procedures and we cannot change that.
You are probably right about FBI not responding to complaints about vandalism. But if they did, dismissing it because of whatever reason is not within their purview. They investigate. The US Attorney decides if there are charges to be filed. As to your assertion that teenagers would pin or cut coax, be real... That is a game that adults play. Most teenagers don't give a hoot about anything enough to do something like that. If they had the technical expertise to DF any ham, they are most likely going to be hams themselves and would not jeopardise their license by committing such a crime. As to your assertion that hams are spiteful, and hate to give up any frequencies, look at it this way: WE ARE NOT LOSING ANY FREQUENCIES HERE... We have no reason to be spiteful. We are not deliberately doing anything.
Hams have a fair share of HF spectrum which we share with other services and hams all over the world. Unlicensed operations have no priority to hams or the FCC or any other legislative or government agency or entity. That is the essence of "Unlicensed". The HF spectrum already belongs to the public; it just does not belong exclusively to BPL. The hams are not keeping you from using your applications. It's up to the FCC; you have already proven that in your post about the FCC reallocating 220 MHz. The ARRL does not have authority to make rules or keep anyone in or out of ham radio. The Morse code requirement is a separate subject altogether and does not warrant comment in this thread.
You have admitted to refusing to study for what you describe as an "antiquated form of communication" so you could "hook up with a group of radio snobs"... Reverse classism is just as bad as snobbery in my book, so please don't paint me with that brush. I have known hams to be as friendly as any other people I have met. The same is true for CBers with whom I associate, so there really is no comparison or need to over generalize. I would submit the social difficulty is yours alone. As to your claim of hams vandalizing other hams, you will have to do better than a vague, indirect accusation.
Your Pollyanna comment does not justify or prove anything. If you are going to cast aspersions, you will have to show some kind of convincing proof. Interference occurs when you own a crappy piece of junk. Any ham who would ignore reports of his station interfering to the point that the FCC had to step in and take action would either clear up the cause or have his license revoked. Believe me, no ham wants that. There are bad apples in every hobby; do you advocate abolishing all hobbies? Your assertion that there are a few bad hams in no way justifies taking down the entire HF bad just so people can have broadband.
You are right about the radio spectrum being a public resource. Allocations are made by the FCC, not hams. BPL benefitting more people than ham radio is not an issue. The two benefit different people for different reasons; just because you cannot or will not see the benefits does not validate your opinion. Hams need not move our operations to another part of the spectrum. If the FCC reallocates the spectrum in which we are now operating then we will cease operations there. But if we happen to step on your unlicensed BPL operation then too bad. If you want hams to stop so you can have BPL, then go to the FCC and make your wishes known. Don't expect us to step aside just because you want to come in and push us out of the spectrum we now have. Hams don't have to go out of their way to interfere with BPL; it's a natural result of the operation of the two technologies simultaneously. So if you want to have our part of the spectrum, you will have to go to the FCC. We're not going to step down just because you say so. We are not the squatters here. We are the licensed and authorized tenants of this parcel of spectrum. If you don't like it then get the FCC to evict us. BPL is the squatter.
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. You know what I hate? Indian Givers... No, I take that back. »www.folsomtech.com | |
| | | | | | | | |
GoodBuddy
@168.143.x.x
| Re: Good I accept your apology and in turn I apologize if my remarks have been unnecessarily abrasive. I think what I want to say now is that my remarks were almost entirely a negative reaction to other posts here, where hams were in effect saying the would go out of their way to disrupt BPL communications just to show that they had priority on those frequencies. I even saw a message here where some hams were talking about conducting a net on those frequencies.
What many here don't seem to get is that it's frustrating to those of us who are not in ham radio to see hams hogging all the spectrum they can and begrudging others the use of it. Maybe the hams in your neck of the woods got along fine with the CB'ers, but I will just say that such was not the case everywhere. And I will admit that some CB'ers deserved scorn, but hams seemed all too willing to tar every CB'er with the same brush. Anyway, that's old history now.
The real crux of the matter is this: Many people, particularly in rural areas, can't get broadband at all because there's no cable service (or the cable company won't offer broadband) and the phone company claims that you're too far away for DSL, if they even offer it. And even where broadband is available, it may be priced too high, or you may be forced to take a service you don't want to get it (such as basic cable, where maybe you prefer satellite TV). The electric companies go everywhere, even to places where there is no phone service.
The public wants reasonably-priced broadband. Compare the number of people using the Internet to the number who are hams, and if it were simply a matter of favoring the majority (by number, not by who is the most vocal), I strongly suspect that Internet usage would win. If you took a vote tomorrow of all the people in the United States, and said that we have a small slice of radio spectrum that can be used for either ham radio or for providing high speed Internet service to people who don't have it or can't afford it at the present rates, I think that today most people would side with providing Internet service.
However I understand the principle of "tyranny of the majority" so I would not necessarily say the majority should always rule, all else being equal. But in this case, hams really do have all sorts of frequencies they can operate on. What is so special about that particular chunk of bandwidth?
If you really want to reduce the demand for BPL, so that it dies on the vine, considering lobbying the FCC to stop forced bundling of broadband with other services, such as telephone service or cable service, and to make force phone companies to offer DSL to all their subscribers within a reasonable time - to do that they could simply reclassify DSL as part of the basic service that phone companies are required to provide. And maybe also to keep an eye on prices, so that rates don't skyrocket the way cable TV prices have.
I'm certainly not a booster of giving bandwidth to big business. In fact I kind of miss the days before cell phones came along, when nearly everyone had a CB in their car - you could actually reach someone (provided they were within range) and not have to pay a huge monthly rate for each phone. Another thing about CB was that for the most part, it was the poor man's way to use his slice of the radio spectrum. It may have been the garbage dump of radio, but you didn't need either a couple thousand dollars or an education in electronic theory to get into it.
And I guess that's my other point. One reason I personally tend to dislike hams is that they are a little like religious zealots - they think all the world's problems would be solved and life would be peachy keen if everyone became a ham. They just don't seem to understand that ham radio isn't an appealing hobby for most people. Spending hours behind a radio to make a brief contact with someone on the other side of the world, then sending them a postcard to prove you talked to them (I could never figure out the point of that) just doesn't have any appeal to most people. I realize that the hobby is much more than that nowadays, but it is still an expensive hobby to get into (assuming you are like most people and have very little interest in building electronic equipment), and if you don't enjoy playing the game of "my tower is bigger than your tower" it's not going to be much fun. And anyway, why do you need ham radio to talk around the world when you can fire up ICQ or AIM, or a VoIP program? Maybe you find it really cool to bounce signals off the moon, but I can't think of anything much more boring - there's so much latency there it's a pretty useless way to communicate, other than the "look what I did" factor.
Many hams are, pardon me for saying it this way, competitive nerds - each is trying to out-nerd the other. Most of the rest of us don't want to be that. We just want to use a little of those "public airwaves" to do something useful for us, and if being able to access the Internet is one such use, people should be able to do that. And maybe the hams should be gracious and step aside, or maybe they should figure out where a better place in the radio spectrum would be for BPL, and ask the FCC to put it there. But this attitude of "lets just do everything we can to make life hell for our neighbors who subscribe to BPL" is repugnant to me. And I must say, I don't agree that hams have any irrevocable title deed to a piece of spectrum - as times change, utilization of the airwaves needs to be re-thought, and it's not only the hams that have been required to give up space - what about the upper UHF TV channels, those were taken away from the commercial broadcasters!
That's all I have to say on the subject - I doubt most hams would ever agree, and would fight it the way members of a country club would fight off any sale of a portion of their precious real estate (but it could be argued that the radio spectrum should be more like a public beach, shared by everyone, with different uses at different times and on different parts of the beach. You might play beach volleyball there, but it's not your private court). BPL is a valid public use of the spectrum and it (hopefully) cannot give rise to the abuses of CB, or anything like that. | |
| | | | | | | | | |
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | Re: Good Thank you for your reply. I appreciate you taking the time to elaborate on your position.
You raise some interesting points, and this is definitely an extremely polarizing issue.
Consider, though, the efficient "long haul" nature of HF. The spectrum that is proposed by BPL is 2-80 MHz. The HF spectrum is 2-30 (thereabouts) MHz. In order to facilitate the successful deployment of BPL, all of the services that presently are allocated to HF (not just the US, but all over the world) would have to be dismantled, as well as all the services that reside in the remaining spectrum of 30-80 MHz. This is just not practical. BPL has been tried and has failed in numerous other countries.
Hams have only a small portion of HF... Less than 10% of the HF spectrum is allocated to us. The reallocation of sufficient spectrum to make BPL feasible would completely eliminate our use of HF. This is not only unacceptable but wasteful. The number of people that would benefit from BPL in this country alone is vastly outweighed by the number of people who benefit from HF in all its numerous uses.
That hams are the only major voice in this matter is not hard to understand if you consider that there are government/public sector employees who have their own views but are prohibited by law from stating such. That leaves the private sector to hash it out in forums such as this; a virtual vacuum, wherein the only players are at each other's throats to get the last word.
Hams versus CBers: A tough nut to crack, to be sure. Naturally there are those who think the other is/are profoundly bad and has no place in the RF spectrum. I happen to believe that ham and CB are both valuable and viable for their own virtues and I accept both as such. There are many more problems, however, with CB that are due mainly to little enforcement by the FCC, fostering a free-for-all mentality that sometimes spills over into the collective opinions of many individuals... For good or bad this is merely a fact. There are CBers and hams who are not so good. But the majority of hams, as a percentage, compared to CBers, are good operators who police ourselves.
The people in the rural areas are not likely to get BPL. The cost of provisioning the lines with all the equipment necessary to provide the level of service that BPL vendors promise far outstrips the costs associated with upgrading and provisioning telephone lines and infrastructures with DSL. This is the "dirty little secret" the BPL vendors are not telling. For this reason(among others which have been exhaustively discussed) BPL is not a viable technology.
I understand your position and frustration about hams being a "members only" club, but we are not all like that. You may have met a few like that, but I assure you the VAST majority of us are not that way. We love RF communications for the sake of it and for the experimentation and everything else that ham radio has to offer. For myself, ham alone is not enough; I use CB, FRS, MURS, 49 MHz and any other radio I can legally get my hands on. It's about perspective; there are those who have an all consuming hunger for anything that they lose sight of what is important.
"Tyranny of the majority" is one I have not heard in a while... I'm glad that certain facets of our society are not "up for a vote", because this would disenfranchise minorities. The special attachment we hams have for HF is the ability to speak directly to another person on the other side of the world without having to be physically connected by a phone line or internet software. I admit this puts us at odds with the BPL/IP camp.
I would be overjoyed to see broadband in every household. I agree with you in that DSL must be rolled out to every house that has a phone line. It's a lot cheaper and more reliable than BPL promises to be, but the BPL vendors have not told the public about what the cost of deployment will be. That is a shell game that the customers are bound to lose. When BPL fails because of (legal) RFI, the customers of the utilities will be left holding the bag, because the investor's money will have to be repaid. Electricity rates will skyrocket and many people will lose their life savings, retirement, etc...
I understand ham radio is not for everyone. But all hobbies are like that. Not everyone "gets" another person's hobby. I think this causes a lot of discord on this issue.
In closing, your example of the HF spectrum being like a public beach is an apt one, but I would add also that BPL wants the whole beach, not just a portion of it. Hams have always been concerned not with preserving only our "fair share" of the spectrum but also the entire HF band for all who need it. BPL is the ultimate example of "bloatware".
Cheers.
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. You know what I hate? Indian Givers... No, I take that back. »www.folsomtech.com | |
| | | | | | | | 
Balzer
Cat Man Dew
join:2000-12-18
Tulsa
 ·Cox HSI
| said by GoodBuddy:
So I got 2 meters and 220 MHz confused. So UPS never developed the system. Big deal, it still proved to hams that they did not run the FCC.
Ham radio is not the only service that will be hurt! Who said we run the fcc?
said by GoodBuddy:
As for encouraging vandalism, a Federal crime, etc. etc. I somehow doubt the FBI is going to come out and investigate a coax pinning, especially if you brought it upon yourself by deliberately interfering with other people's broadband communication. I don't have to encourage such a thing, I'm just telling you that you don't want a bunch of pissed-off teenagers upset with you because you're deliberately ruining their online experience, especially if they figure out you're doing it just to be spiteful because you hate giving up any frequencies.
Well the fact of the matter is that hams and cbers will interfere with bpl regardless.
said by GoodBuddy:
You hams have a whole lot of bandwidth to play with already, why do you so begrudge others use of the bandwidth, especially for unlicensed applications? That bandwidth should belong to everyone, not just those willing to join your cult and play by the rules that the old farts at the ARRL insist on hanging onto. Yes, code is finally going away but only because the so many of the old brass pounders who lobbied the FCC to keep the code requirement have finally gone on to that great ham shack in the sky. The code requirement should have been dropped forty years ago.
Its not the arrl that wants to hang on to the code its the fcc. Hams have very little bandwidth in the big picture. 10% of hf is for ham the other 90% is for other services.
said by GoodBuddy:
And for the record: Yes, I am one of those who refused to study an antiquated form of communication just so I could hook up with a group of radio snobs. And no, I never either had my cable damaged, nor did I ever damage anyone else's equipment. But I know it happened, and it usually happened to people who thought they were the king of the airwaves and that nobody could touch them. And believe me when I say that hams weren't totally above doing a little vandalism toward other hams from time to time.
Now I fully agree with the comments about the CB'ers who pump out illegal power with harmonics all over the spectrum. But let's not play Pollyanna here and act like there's never been a ham who was totally unconcerned about how he was messing up his neighbor's TV reception. You probably wouldn't know about that because the neighbors probably wouldn't write the ARRL and tell them. But let's not pretend that ham radio doesn't have its share of bad apples (some of whom aren't even former CB'ers).
Perhaps my message was a bit more provocative than it needed to be but I think it is high time that hams realized that the radio spectrum is a public resource. For too long hams have treated it like a "members only" beach, when in fact the beach belongs to all the taxpayers. In my opinion, power line broadband will benefit far more people than ham radio ever did or ever will. And what I was really reacting to was the implication that hams would deliberately go out of their way to disrupt the broadband connections of their neighbors just to prove a point, when they could just as easily move their operations to another part of the spectrum. So whatever names I have been called really should be attached to those hams who intend to squat on frequencies to deliberately disrupt broadband, just because they think they can. At least until the neighborhood teenagers figure out what's going on, that is.
cb is much more useless than ham radio. I have seen more bad cbers than i have bad hams. Move to another spectrum? Ok tell me where? Why dont they move bpl? Or cb? If you want broadband move to an area that has it. Ham radio is not the only service that will be hurt!
--
Televangelists are The Pro Wrestlers of religion! | |
| | | | | | | | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| You know individuals like YOU are the reason we had those rules and requirements. To keep the like of you from ruining the bands. Look what happened to 11 meters. Nuf Said.
Now they are dumbing up the license requirements even more and providing a Code Free HF License to allow the likes of you to have access to HF bands. Maybe it is in the design that they do this now just before BPL is widely deployed. What the heck the bands will be ruined anyway let's let them have their no code licenses. After all when BPL is widely deployed, the more stations keying up on each other the better right? | |
| | | | | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| I don't know why I bother responding to the drive-bys, but I can't pass up an opportunity to whip out the cluebat.
said by GoodBuddy:
The biggest laugh I ever got was the day I found out some of your two-meter frequencies had been taken away and given to United Parcel. Guess it proves you guys really don't have your way with the FCC. And, I know that real-time tracking of UPS packages has been of far more benefit to me than the existence of ham radio ever has.
Actually, that was 220-222MHz (that's 1.25 meters), and UPS doesn't even use the band. Amateurs still have secondary operating privileges there (Primary is AMTS). In fact, we gained an additional MHz of spectrum at 219-220MHz. How very amusing indeed.
said by GoodBuddy:
I know the complaints we used to get from neighbors when operating only five watt rigs; I can just imagine how your neighbors must feel about you pumping out 500 or 1000 watts.
Interestingly, when you meet FCC regulations for spectral purity and use good equipment, you don't get very many - if any - RFI complaints. The last time I had an RFI complaint was in 1991, and was quickly resolved with an RF choke on a phone line.
said by GoodBuddy:
Anyway, you start screwing up people's broadband and you'd better find a source of coax cable in bulk, because you're probably going to need it. Pins and wire cutters are a lot cheaper than coax. Of course, you could go with the trained dobermans, but then there's all that dog food to buy, and besides, they might enjoy chewing wires themselves!
Ah, the "Rules don't apply to me" and "I'll git you" attitude. Crap like this is why the big bad hams are mean to you. Maybe when you grow up you'll get a little respect.
By the way, coax is a lot cheaper than fines and jail time. The choice is yours.
TAIN FOAR?
tenbase OUT.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | | | | |
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Verizon FIOS
1 edit | said by GoodBuddy:
As a former CB radio operator who always resented the arrogant, nose-high-in-the-air attitude that the local hams displayed toward us (despite the fact that most of us were running legal rigs), we do know the tricks to shut down guys like you. Unless you have an eight foot high chain link fence with razor wire on the top and trained dobermans inside, don't count on the fact that you'll be able to mess up our Internet connections for very long.
You guys are an anachronism anyway - you get your jollies by saying you provide emergency communications, and sure, the authorities will use you in a pinch because you'll work for free and are eager for any excuse to prove that your hobby isn't just an expensive toy. But you've used your infernal Morse code to keep people out of your little playhouse for so long that a lot of the rest of us wish you'd just pack it up and find another hobby, so we can go back to watching TV and using our radios and telephones without interference from you morons. I know the complaints we used to get from neighbors when operating only five watt rigs; I can just imagine how your neighbors must feel about you pumping out 500 or 1000 watts.
The emergency people all have their own two-way equipment and we also have a large network of cellular towers. Relatively few disasters bring down both wireline and cellular communications; for those the National Guard could be called in, but of course they don't work for free. But for one real need ever 20 years or so, I think we could manage to pay them for a day or two.
The biggest laugh I ever got was the day I found out some of your two-meter frequencies had been taken away and given to United Parcel. Guess it proves you guys really don't have your way with the FCC. And, I know that real-time tracking of UPS packages has been of far more benefit to me than the existence of ham radio ever has.
Anyway, you start screwing up people's broadband and you'd better find a source of coax cable in bulk, because you're probably going to need it. Pins and wire cutters are a lot cheaper than coax. Of course, you could go with the trained dobermans, but then there's all that dog food to buy, and besides, they might enjoy chewing wires themselves!
Hey, $h!t for brains! The only ones who are interfering with radio and TV reception are moron CBers who like to turn up their modulation up to 150% and run dirty secondhand amps that were modded by a clueless, self proclamed "expert" with no formal training and no experience beyond twisting pots and observing the S-meter going up. Most of you don't know enough to comment.
Cutting/pinning coax is a practice invented by moron CBers. I am also a CBer, but not the kind you seem to wannabe. I run legal and I actually KNOW what goes on inside my radio. I know all the pots, what they do and how to "Mod" them out if I want to. And if I did, there would be no way to tell by the sound of the audio, or spectrally, because I know what I am doing. You guys with your golden screwdrivers need to get bent already.
Get your facts straight before you come here spouting garbage. Amateurs did not "Lose" two meters. The FCC reallocated the 1.25 meter band. It just wasn't being used enough. So what? You died laughing about something you knew almost nothing about. Way to go, moron!
It's the fault of moron CBers who got the rules changed so that amps are no longer permitted for radios that even come CLOSE to 11 meters.
Try stepping on my property to take down my coax and you'll have an a$$ full of rock salt. I won't bother with the dogs or razor wire.
My neighbors don't know when I am operating. That is because I run a CLEAN station. The ones who come to me with a complaint, I am willing to help them work it out, whether or not it is my station interfering with their antiquated, poorly filtered, defective equipment. Moron CBers will tell their neighbors, "Tough $h!t" and put up razor wire and dogs.
Hams welcome any new "member of the club". You need only pass a test. No morse code required. Guess what? The questions and answers are available on the internet! The CBers who are also hams are easy to spot: we don't do things the same way as moron CBers. We actually use our equipment to communicate with each other; not to see who's got the biggest bladder in some childish pi$$ing contest...
We build our own equipment. We help out in times of emergency because that is part of our hobby. We experiment with new forms of radio communications. We innovate.
Moron CBers imitate, overmodulate, hate and masturbate.
Anonymous posters have absolutely NO credibility; especially hate spewing, backwards, ignorant, clueless trolls like yourself who are too cowardly to join BBR "for real" and post a profile.
You sound like a grade A-1 a$$hole. I bet the reason you are a "former CBer" is that you got your coax cut and decided to give it up.
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. You know what I hate? Indian Givers... No, I take that back. »www.folsomtech.com | |
| | | | |
mad_ham
@midco.net | well a will just park my beam at the power pole and transmit my 1.5kw all day and i will interfer with bpl the way it interfers with me. | |
| | | | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: Good said by mad_ham:
well a will just park my beam at the power pole and transmit my 1.5kw all day and i will interfer with bpl the way it interfers with me.
I wouldn't condone blatantly deliberate interference as it's not very productive. Yes, AFAIK under Part 15 there's really no concept of deliberate interference against an unlicensed service, but it gives our service a bad name. You're going to see ingress interference from normal operations anyway.
What bands you operate, mad? | |
| | | | | | | | Tommyastro
join:2004-01-18
Poughkeepsie, NY | We'll see who's sucking it if or when they implement this thing. Better get the Chap Stick(tm) ready....
Tom | |
| | | |
Balzer
Cat Man Dew
join:2000-12-18
Tulsa
·Cox HSI
| Shortly after stepping off Air Force One February 5 during a visit to South Carolina, President George W. Bush took a few moments to express his appreciation to ARRL member and Charleston County ARES Emergency Coordinator Charlie Hall, K4AOT. "For all Charlie has done for ham radio and the community, he certainly deserves to be put in the spotlight," said his friend Alex Krist, KR1ST. A member of the Charleston Amateur Radio Society and a retired US Army sergeant, Hall, 64, volunteers with a newly formed Community Emergency Response Team (CERT) »www.citizencorps.gov/programs/cert.shtm, a Citizen Corps »www.citizencorps.gov/ program. The president shook Hall's hand and thanked him for his efforts on behalf of the community. ARRL is a Citizen Corps affiliate, and in a growing number of localities, Amateur Radio emergency response activities are being incorporated into CERTs. Hall, who also volunteers with the American Red Cross and a SKYWARN team, was tapped as Charleston County's "official greeter" for the presidential visit mainly because of his Citizen Corp/CERT activity.--some information from Alex Krist, KR1ST, and Jim Boehner, N2ZZ
Source:
The ARRL Letter Vol. 23, No. 07 February 13, 2004
--
Televangelists are The Pro Wrestlers of religion! | |
| | | | | Kommie
join:2003-05-13
East Haven, CT
| Re: Good for who? said by Balzer  :
Well I'm glad that VOIP will take a hit as well.
BPL will hurt far more that it will help. What will YOU do when the EMS crews can't get the address right or a plane crashes in to a school? It's been said way to many times already. I think if anything happens due to BPL interference then the people that pay for it should be held accountable for any problems from the system. All radio services will be hurt by BPL!
Ever hear of satellite ? How about Solar Power? How about battery backup ? I am sure the EMS Crews can easily replace the aging Ham... | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: Good for who? said by Kommie :
Ever hear of satellite ? How about Solar Power? How about battery backup ? I am sure the EMS Crews can easily replace the aging Ham...
Ummm, yeah, I've heard of satellites. Amateur Radio has about 25 or so in orbit right now. | |
| | | | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| Re: Good for who? Not to mention the amateur equipment on board the ISS and Space Shuttles.
Horse and buggy indeed. 
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | | | | | Tommyastro
join:2004-01-18
Poughkeepsie, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Good for who? Tenbase wrote:
" Not to mention the amateur equipment on board the ISS and Space Shuttles."
The space shuttles haven't carried ham gear for a few years.
The ISS has a LOT of gear now though, including SSTV which hopefully will be up and running eventually.
Tom | |
| | | | | | | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
|  Re: Good for who?
Not to mention you cannot have a power strip or a UPS with EMI filtering in it either, it will block your beloved porn from comming into the building! You can thank the incompetence/money hungryness at the FCC for this. | |
| | | | | | | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| Re: Good for who? said by w2co :
Again another mis-informed know it all loin lickin beaurocratic AH, who thinks they know everything about everything.
Tell us how you really feel Tom
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | | | | | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| To be honest I am not real familiar with the current state of the SAREX program. But three hams were on board Columbia when it went down. I do not know if they regularly take amateur radio gear up or not.
STS-114, which will launch hopefully this year (but probably in '05), will have six hams on board (KD5EDS, KC5ZSW, KC5ZSY, KC5KII, KD5TVP and KD5CHF/VK5MIR.) Someone better at least bring a 2m HT with them
You are right about the ISS, they have a new TM-D700E and I think they are getting an FT-100 as well. Definitely no shortage of ham gear up there.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | | | | | | | Tommyastro
join:2004-01-18
Poughkeepsie, NY
·RoadRunner Cable
| Re: Good for who? Shuttles have stopped using ham gear once the ISS had the 2 meter rig up and running. Most astronauts are becoming hams now it seems, almost like it's a part of trainng.
I do miss Mir a LOT though, John Blaha, KC5TZQ was my first (and so far only) voice contact from space while he lived on Mir. I made MANY packet contacts with Mir as well. That was a VERY fun time for me. I also have a shuttle packet robot contact as well but never got the contact number. It was either STS-78 or 67.
Tom - KB2SMS | |
| | | |
Balzer
Cat Man Dew
join:2000-12-18
Tulsa
·Cox HSI
| Did I say anything about ham radio? NO
BTW EMS crews don't use ham radio anyway.
Did I say anything about power? NO
I'm sorry that you hate yourself and your fellow man so much that you don't care about what is going to happen when they turn up bpl. But what and why should I care?
--
Televangelists are The Pro Wrestlers of religion! | |
| | | | | | 
dvd536
as Mr. Pink as they come
Premium
join:2001-04-27
Phoenix, AZ
| Re: Good said by Stewy85 :
WOOHOO! Maybe we can get cheap broadband now.
And Charter levels of service. *yawn*. it just simply isnt a good idea to pollute the airwaves when the best you're going to see(under optimal conditions) is 512kbps.
--
You can never be too rich, too thin or have too much Bandwidth | |
| | | Estragon
join:2003-06-20
Greenville, NH | Re: Good Please remember than 512kbps is a 20X speed improvement for some of us out here. | |
| | | | BunnYwood
Premium
join:2002-06-19
Sioux City, IA | Re: Good And if you're that far out there the power company won't bother with you either. This takes as much new equipment as DSL does, that part is just ignored. | |
| | | 
WillHaeck
join:2002-01-20
Monroe, WA | Not a cheap solution BPL won't be the way to cheap broadband, its just another way to deliver the same old screw to the consumer. | |
| | David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
 ·Be There
| Re: Not a cheap solution said by WillHaeck :
BPL won't be the way to cheap broadband, its just another way to deliver the same old screw to the consumer.
and subsidized by your electricity bills. | |
| 
Mellow
Premium
join:2001-11-16
Salisbury, MD | key word "rural" Thats fine if they use it for the boondocks applications. Just dont bring that crap into the big city screwing up everything else. Im sure alot of people would rather have this than satellite. | |
| | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| Re: key word "rural" It has also been said many times that it will not be profitable to deploy in remote areas, the big cities are the first place it will be deployed as the customer base there is much larger. Another BIG mistake by the FCC. This may be good in a way for now, the problems will show up big time as soon as larger areas are wiped out by the RF hash created. I wonder when the NTIA study will be released? | |
| | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: key word "rural" said by w2co :
It has also been said many times that it will not be profitable to deploy in remote areas, the big cities are the first place it will be deployed as the customer base there is much larger. Another BIG mistake by the FCC. This may be good in a way for now, the problems will show up big time as soon as larger areas are wiped out by the RF hash created. I wonder when the NTIA study will be released?
It's funny how Powell latched onto the rural promise of BPL. That's probably the weakest pillar of the BPL model. "Internet in every outlet" is another fallacy. While I realize this is political rhetoric, can you imagine the amount of infrastructure to make this work ? Meanwhile there's copper pairs all over the place and an obscene amount of unlit fiber traversing the country.
As far as the NTIA study, I'm not sure the FCC cares. They ignored 5000 comments, several studies, and field measurements. Unless perhaps Powell doesn't want the death of BPL blamed on his administration and he wants the NTIA to pull rank and pull the plug on BPL. | |
| | | | w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO | Re: key word "rural" Well my guess is that as soon as the Bush admistration is voted out, Powell will follow! He's just trying to do his damage now before the ship sinks...This is what I mean when I say "heads will roll" for this crappy decision. | |
| | 
Eat Me
join:2002-09-25
Sussex, NJ | Even if it's just rural, it's still bad. The noise from BPL will still find its way back to civilization thanks to radio wave propagation. | |
| 
acehyde
Tired.
Premium
join:2001-08-14
clubs: | Alright!!! Now, finally I may be able to get broadband at my house.
Hopefully, people living in very rural portions of the US will be able to take advantage of this (like me  ) | |
| | | | | | |
acehyde
Tired.
Premium
join:2001-08-14
clubs: | Nope. The DSL review that you see in my profile is the one that I used at work (have since terminated it and went with a full T1 for Internet access). | |
| | |
The Folsom
Kindly Shut Your Noise Hole.
Premium
join:2003-01-31
Yucaipa, CA
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Alright!!! said by acehyde :
Nope. The DSL review that you see in my profile is the one that I used at work (have since terminated it and went with a full T1 for Internet access).
Thank you for clearing that up.
Cheers.
--
I once accidentally spilled spot remover on my dog and he disappeared. You know what I hate? Indian Givers... No, I take that back. »www.folsomtech.com | |
| | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA | Now inquiring minds know Good luck in your quest for broadband. | |
| 
AD7BK
Premium
join:2000-03-23
Port Orchard, WA
·wavebroadband
2 edits | I truely hope you all are happy I hope those who get it don't have the old 49 MHZ phones or have 49 MHZ walkie talkies, or have R/C toys, or pick up channels 2-5 off the air, or use CB radio or listen to shortwave because BPL is going to destroy it. I am very very disappointed in the FCC. Micheal Powell, Kathrine, and others at the FCC have been given a lot of money to say "OK" to it. (Sarcasm) Well Thanks a lot FCC you just destroyed the HF spectrum. And remember those who want BPL you will not be able to use any of the above. And when someone uses a CB or Ham radio it will interfere with your internet connection. And there is nothing you can do about it. You can complain but the FCC will say "it is a part 15 device we cannot help you." Part 15 devices must accept interference and must not cause interference to licensed services or part 95 services.
Sure they can NOTCH out the various bands but that will degrade the service.
I am sorry folks but BPL is a joke. No matter what you say not matter how you will hate Ham Operators, CB Radio users, and other users of the frequencies between 2mhz to 80 mhz BPL will have zero protection from anything that is in there. I can see a lot of the BPL users try to tear down peoples antennas because they cant get their mail or what ever.
If you get it and you have a CB-er or a Ham near you except it to drop.
It has been proven that 10 watts from a ham transmitter or as little as 4 watts from a CB radio can kill BPL. So I am waiting for when everyone gets it then complains to the FCC then watch it be dropped like a hot potato.
In my mind the FCC has been greased by the greedy corporations (Power and BPL Modem makers) so I have zero faith in the FCC for protection of the Licensed services.
We will see when there is a emergency and the Red Cross cannot use any HF or the military cannot communicate or ARES/RACES (Amateur radio for those who are clueless as to that org) cannot use the HF band for emergency communications because BPL noise wipes out the receivers of the hams trying to do whatever emergency. (flood fire anything they get involved in) Homeland security will too also suffer the effects of BPL
BPL is not a good IDEA unless they go up into the 5ghz frequencies or finds some way to use Spread Spectrum (Which will be a good way to completely eliminate interference)
--
The following statement is true...
The Proceeding statement was false!!
--George Carlin | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
kv5e
Ride Free
Premium
join:2001-12-04
Mesquite, TX
|  Part 15 Untouched
This really is a poor implementation of connectivity for Internet access. It's a cheap way out for the service providers and it will be very troublesome for the users.
What really bothers me is I like to be a good neighbor. Now when someones' modem loses block sync because I want to operate HF, I will have to explain to the neighbor, it's not my fault. I am licensed, meet the spectral emission requirements, and I am a primary user of the spectrum.
Sorry, you are SOL. You've been chumped by the Power Company!
KiloVolt 5 Electron Legally QRMing friends by FCC NPRM | |
| RFJock
join:2004-01-13
Norfolk, VA
| Where is Prospect Street? Interesting that according to recent announcements, Prospect Street Broadband was supposed to have "gone live" with BPL in Manassas some 4 weeks ago. And yet I see no listing for them as an ISP here on BBR and can find no sub reviews of their service. Wonder if they hav'nt actually gone live yet? | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| Nothing has changed First impressions, having not read the NPRM. And remember, the FCC release is JUST a proposal, not actual rules. Once the NPRM is released, the comments period begins.
BPL was already legal to deploy as long as it met Part 15 emission limits, and this is where the FCC's NPRM comes into play:
1. The BPL industry wanted Part 15 limits relaxed, the FCC said NO.
2. Unlike any other Part 15 device, BPL equipment must use "adaptive interference-mitigation techniques". Given the BPL industries continuing claims that there is no interference potential, that is pretty telling.
3. All BPL deployments and equipment locations must be 'registered', so there will be no hiding from the imminent interference complaints.
Without going into great detail on the above points, BPL vendors are soon going to realize that there are so many restrictions that deploying this technology is going to cost a lot more than they had anticipated. Further, there have been reports of electrical utilities flat-out refusing to touch BPL due to the RFI issues.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | 
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02
Host:
Road Runner
PC gaming GAMES
PC gaming Tech
| Re: Nothing has changed quote:
1. The BPL industry wanted Part 15 limits relaxed, the FCC said NO.
That's perspective, and can easily be rephrased as
quote:
1. Several government agencies and radio hobbyists wanted Part 15 limits raised, the FCC said NO.
| |
| | |
tenbase
join:2000-07-19
Alexandria, VA
| Re: Nothing has changed The BPL industry was specifically asking for Part 15 regs to be relaxed in order to deploy this tech, and the FCC refused. I'd say that's a "No".
The fact several government agencies and radio hobbyists opposed relaxing Part 15 regs in reaction to the BPL lobby proposal is pretty inconsequential.
--
I would kill everyone on this forum for a drop of sweet beer.. | |
| | | |
Karl Bode
News Guy
join:2000-03-02 | Re: Nothing has changed Well the not only opposed relaxing them, they wanted them to be more stringent. How consequential you consider that probably depends on which side of the coin you sit..... | |
| | | | | RadioDoc
58ef2c0
Premium,ExMod 2000-03
join:2000-05-11
·AT&T Midwest
| Re: Nothing has changed There is no coin at all, actually. Part 15 is pretty well fleshed out and the reasoning behind the limits is well proven by decades of unlicensed device operation and the compromises made between interference and usefulness of these devices.
Maybe you have forgotten the battle that raged between computer manufacturers and the FCC over incidental radiation from CPUs and peripherals back in the 1980s. A single non-complying computer could wipe out over the air TV reception to an entire apartment building, among other things. Many pundits complained that the FCC was unreasonably restraining "innovation" by requiring manufacturers to limit radiation so as to not "interrupt Aunt Mildred's soap operas". Somehow the personal computer industry figured out how to do it right and survived those nasty FCC rules.
If BPL is more than just penny-stock hype, it will too. If not, good riddance. | |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| (Monkey) Business as Usual at the FCC Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein played the middle. "We need to be mindful of harmful interference, but we can’t let unsupported claims stand in the way of this kind of innovation."
Adelstein said this despite several computer models showing the interference potential and field measurements. But then the FCC turns around and promotes unproven adaptive technologies as a solution to interference mitigation. Common sense thinking about this shows that it's unlikely it will prevent the problems we foresee. What makes this even worse is that they met with a BPL vendor around the end of January discussing adaptive technologies. Coincidence ? I think not
Also, how is a Dark Ages style radiating wired network considered "innovation"? Once again the technical ineptness of our Commisioners shine through.
The FCC ignored 5000 comments against BPL and didn't wait until the NTIA released their test results. This speaks volumes. The FCC will do whatever it wants and will follow the money, regardless of public outcry. We saw it happen with media ownership. | |
| |
See 9 replies to this post | |
w8ufo
join:2000-11-02
Evanston, IL
·Comcast Formerly ..
| Unproven? Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein played the middle. "We need to be mindful of harmful interference, but we can’t let unsupported claims stand in the way of this kind of innovation." The word "innovation" could likely be replaced with the word "profit" by many critics.
What!? Take a look at »www.arrl.org/news/features/2004/01/20/1/ . There are more studies out there, but the FCC has refused to look at all the facts.
This will disrupt emergency and commercial communications to the point where lives will be lost. The FCC has demonstrated that they care more about "innovation" then they do about human lives.
I am VERY unsatisfied with the FCC and hope that I happen to see them in need of communications. Imagine a situation where phones and other services are out and emergency radio traffic can't get out of an affected area because of the noise. "Gosh, I can't help ya there partner, maybe you need to find BPL to get your wife/husband/child/loved one aid." | |
| |
See 6 replies to this post | |
| | David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
·Be There
| Re: more proof powell is an idiot BPL has never been rolled out in any rural community anywhere in the world.
Germany has the most BPL (PLC/PLT) installations (about 7,000). The German FCC has recently made their position clear “German Government does not regard a European legal framework which results in general freedom to use PLC as desirable at the present time, because Germany has a lot of negative experience with the compatibility of radio networks and line-bound networks. Initial findings about PLC applications suggest that, despite contrary assurances by the manufacturers, the (radio pollution) ceilings in force nationally cannot be adhered to.”
The country with the most PLC (BPL) users says it is not compatible with radio services, so why are we bothering with this broken, failed and legacy technology?
There are many proven alternatives, DSL, WiMax, WiFi, MMDS, Cable, Fiber etc. | |
| nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD | dodging things ....arguing the FCC was "dodging" some of the harder questions about the technology.
the FCC has been dodging a lot of things during commissioner Powell's reign.
Except perhaps the urgings of big media and the ILECs | |
| 
plk
bo may sleep in loft
Premium
join:2002-04-20
Ogden, IA
| Wow...512kbps? Tell me it's not true? I would not spend a dime to deploy it. It is too little too late in the cities and towns and not cost effective in the sticks. My guess is the Powell clan is going along with it so they have an excuse to give the Bell total deregulation.
Once that happens we will see a short lived price war with the cables as the local ISP's quickly die. I mean within weeks.
Imagine how quickly the Bells could get their Monopolies back. Watch for them to start buying backbones just before it happens.
Another reason we don't want it is it might slow FTTH deployment. (Something the power companies should be all over anyway) I can get 1meg up/down via FTTH for 20 bucks within the next few months.
--
Thermaltake 2000a/Asus P4C-e/p4 2.8/ocz3500 2x512/WD.2x200g/ATI 9600/APC sua 1500/ crappy monitor&sound 4 now. adding 19in LCD & better sound. maybe OC some too. | |
| 
richk_1957
If ..Then..Else
Premium
join:2001-04-11
Minas Tirith
| Come Contest Time, BPL will be wiped out! Fact: Hams are legally allowed to run 1KW (1,00 watts) max and while not many run that amount, during many contests DX (Distance), Field Day, & others, many hams run a respectable amount. This could provide eonough interference to make BPL useless. And what about conventions? The Dayton Hamvention regularly draws thousands, many who run mobile radios than run using ham bands from HF to microwave & use anything from milliwatts on up. All of which will wipe out any BPL. And our equipment runs clean, doesn't interfere with other services!
The person who suggested suggested shielding the power lines - be realistic! You're going to have all that high voltage cable replaced? Think of the cost! And that is not considering the cost of high voltage coax.
Any you people who live in rural areas that think this is your ticket to broadband? Forget it! If they do roll it out, it will be in places where they can get the most users - in urban areas. The rural people would come probably last.
So many people have posted the services that would be interfered with I'm not going to start, except to say this: almost all radio services would be interfered with - many of them that provide emergency services.
WA2YEU | |
| |
See 7 replies to this post | |
TXTigerman
Monopolies Kill
join:2000-12-21
Beeville, TX
| They Got It Right For Once!
This is a great thing for the rural customer. It's good to see that the commission didn't buy into all of that "the sky is falling!" BS being put out.
--
If you think that's funny, wait until you see the BILL! | |
| |
See 8 replies to this post | |
kuloth
join:2002-01-22
Georgetown, SC
| Powell and The Rest of the Commisioners are IDIOTS Just as expected. Anyone allowing all the media giants to take over 2 to 5 am, fm or tv stations in one market would pull a boneheaded decision such as this. Again this proves that this commision has no backbone to stand up against the lobbying efforts of big media giants, and now to the power companies. When they install BPL in rural America, and you won't be able to watch your analog TV, who are you gonna call and complain to? The FCC? I bet you'll yell even louder when the FCC tells all the TV stations to pull their analog signals off the air in a few years leaving you with only SDTV or HDTV. And you just bought that 29" inch analog TV at Circuit City? Just shows you just how screwed up this commision is, and so is the Bush Administration!  | |
| David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
·Be There
| New Zealand; power line trial fails “failed to produce commercial results”
»www.computerworld.co.nz/news.nsf···Document
Vector winds down data over power line trial
David Watson, Auckland
A trial in Auckland to run communications links over power lines has failed to produce commercial results and is being wound down.
The trial was started by UnitedNetworks and continued by Vector after its takeover of United.
“We still have some customers connected on a trial basis but haven’t been able to get anything commercially viable,” says Maxine Elliott, general manager of Tangent, Vector’s networking branch. “We can’t get enough distance and the equipment is a bit expensive.”
The small number of homes on Auckland’s North Shore involved in the trial will remain on the PLC (power line communications) technology “and we’ll continue to watch that space”.
In 2002 Buller Electricity announced plans to trial PLC, with a view to supplying broadband to Westport.
Steve Christie, chief executive of The Pacific.Net, a joint venture between Buller Electricity and ISP Tasman Solutions, says “we’ve tested [PLC] and there’s quite a few issues with it worldwide re [radio frequency] leakage”.
He says the organisation’s focus is now on project Probe. ThePacific.Net won the Nelson region Probe tender in October, beating the Telecom-BCL and Woosh-Vodafone consortia.
PLC has a history of not delivering, with Nortel Networks abandoning a PLC project in Britain in the late 1990s, though carriers continue to trial it and watch developments.
The European Commission last week announced it was funding Opera (the Open PLC European Research Alliance) by way of 9 million euros. A uniform European PLC standard is one of Opera’s initial goals. The EC believes PLC will be an effective way to deliver broadband to rural areas and places not served by DSL.
Germany has been at the forefront of PLC development in Europe but Siemens and electricity company Eon have since abandoned their work on it.
In other developments at Tangent, Elliott says with Tangent’s and the former United ethernet metropolitan fibre networks in Auckland and Wellington now linked by a Cisco core, “we’re producing Vector’s communications services.
“Vector uses a lot of comms re equipment and gas and electricity networks and we’re providing the WAN and Scada [supervisory control and data acquisition] solutions.”
Scada refers to software that gathers data in real time from remote locations and is commonly used in the electricity industry.
Vector is also looking at selling bundled power, gas and broadband packages, she says. | |
| | KB3JUV
join:2004-02-15
Lewes, DE
|  Lets do something useful with Comcast and Verizon!
| |
| |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| Re: Lets do something useful with Comcast and Verizon! said by KB3JUV :
Why don't we get Comcast and Verizon together to make up some BS statements about how BPL will screw everything up. They have the outlets to make people want to listen. Comcast and Verizon are regional monopolies and need to find a way to not lose another chunk. Comcast has satellite to worry about and Verizon has Cavalier to worry about now. They can't lose their broadband internet services to the power companies. Lets get something useful out of them...
BS statements aren't useful to either side. In the Amateur community we've largely taken the high road and have kept to the technical facts. We don't need misinformation from large corporate interests....we already have some of that from BPL interests (i.e. "there hasn't been interference", "BPL radiates only as a point source", etc...)
I think you'll see the legal teams of the Comcasts and Verizons attack BPL, but from a regulatory front. They can do what they want, but we shouldn't ride their waves because it isn't relevant to Amateur Radio or HF communications, IMO. | |
| | |
bumpkin
@direcpc.com
| Re: Lets do something useful with Comcast and Verizon! All this hype is just stupid the commen consensus is that this BPL is goint to start up overnight everywhere there is a powerline and its going to knock out all the ems and emergency systems throughout the world and everybodies going to die ....
Ok no first of all do you REALLY think that there going to allow some upstart broadband provider to knock out all these essential systems comeon people lets get real.
Oh and from readin Im still not sure whether you have made up your minds whether the ham will knock out the BPL or vice versa. So just get off your soap box take a chill pill and how many of you have seen this awesomely destructive BPL that gives everbody cancer and makes ambulances blow up? | |
| | | |
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
1 edit | Re: Lets do something useful with Comcast and Verizon! said by bumpkin:
All this hype is just stupid the commen consensus is that this BPL is goint to start up overnight everywhere there is a powerline and its going to knock out all the ems and emergency systems throughout the world and everybodies going to die ....
Ok no first of all do you REALLY think that there going to allow some upstart broadband provider to knock out all these essential systems comeon people lets get real.
Oh and from readin Im still not sure whether you have made up your minds whether the ham will knock out the BPL or vice versa. So just get off your soap box take a chill pill and how many of you have seen this awesomely destructive BPL that gives everbody cancer and makes ambulances blow up?
I think we all agree that BPL won't be everywhere at once, but from the FCC rhetoric one would think otherwise.
You seem to imply there's confusion within the anti-BPL interference camp. There's varying opinions and theories but it's been shown that there will be interference to HF services and HF services could easily interfere with BPL. Interference is most always a two way street, so if you're looking for a clear cut interference "winner", there ain't no such thing in real life. The point that one needs to realize from all of this is that BPL technology and HF services will make each other's existence rather miserable.
Will planes drop out of the sky from BPL ? Probably not. But if you're implying the FCC will protect HF and VHF services, think again. They probably wouldn't intentionally wreck spectrum, but they ignored 5000 comments that were filed by concerned parties and ignored several studies and field measurements. They didn't wait for the results of a study by the NTIA. Considering this administration's lousy record, I wouldn't put much faith in them.
Call this a soapbox if you like, but we're tired of rosy head-in-the-sand misinformation from press releases from BPL vendors, potential carriers and clueless FCC Commisioners with up-and-to-the-right revenue growth charts.
BTW, here's a link to a recent article about the ongoing 800Mhz interference fiasco, unrelated to BPL »www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stori···09:56+AM . The FCC has been didling for two years trying to figure out how to resolve it... and no one can argue the interference is "unproven" or "theoretical". | |
| |
AD7BK
Premium
join:2000-03-23
Port Orchard, WA | Welcome to Broadband Reports. And BPL wont last long the CBers will take em out hi hi
.- -.. --... -... -.-
--
The following statement is true...The Proceeding statement was false!!--George Carlin | |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| HF Frequencies Here's a web page I stumbled upon that lists 1000 HF frequencies of interest »www.monitoringtimes.com/html/mttopHF.html . It's not a complete list of allocations by any means, but it gives a good sample of non-Amateur use of the band. This is why notching is an impossible endeavor and a "national off switch" for use in times of disaster, as some have suggested, isn't realistic. | |
| |
AD7BK
Premium
join:2000-03-23
Port Orchard, WA
·wavebroadband
| Re: HF Frequencies said by rf_engineer :
Here's a web page I stumbled upon that lists 1000 HF frequencies of interest »www.monitoringtimes.com/html/mttopHF.html . It's not a complete list of allocations by any means, but it gives a good sample of non-Amateur use of the band. This is why notching is an impossible endeavor and a "national off switch" for use in times of disaster, as some have suggested, isn't realistic.
And if the NOTCH the bands out it will not only cause problems elsewhere it will degrade the service. So no matter what they do the on the low bands it will not work
--
The following statement is true...The Proceeding statement was false!!--George Carlin | |
| | N0JCG
join:2003-07-18
Minneapolis, MN
| One problem is that it looks like the FCC is putting the burden of detecting and identifying the offending BPL element on the licensed users. This raises all sorts of questions, beyond the obvious of why the burden is on the victim;
1. As a licensed user, will they accept my judgement of harmfull interference?
2. How will they verify it? Hold the phone up to the speaker? Roll a truck?
3. Does this mean an engineer/technician at the BPL head end tweaks things until I'm satisfied?
4. What assures that their database is accurate? What are the penalties for not maintaining it?
5. Is there a max response time?
6. Can I drive around and file a complaint at each device? Why not?
7. If their database is real time, can I drive around with a few hundred watts and watch the BPL repeaters wink off in real time? | |
| | | | | |
|
|
