FCC, Hams Spar Over Powerline BroadbandGroups clash in court as technology flounders.... ( old news - 06:31PM Tuesday Oct 23 2007) tags: fcc · alternatives · BPLAmateur ham operators and the FCC aren't particularly good friends when it comes to broadband over powerline (BPL) technology. The FCC continually insists the niche technology is the next great broadband hope, while hams and engineers note that there's incredible potential for interference with ham and emergency radio. Ham group the ARRL has taken the FCC to court over FCC rules instituted back in 2004 aimed at spurring growth of the technology. The ARRL, who've accused the FCC of cuddling up to BPL vendors and cherry picking data in the past, argues the rules aren't strict enough to manage the technology's interference potential. CNET notes that the two sides are clashing in court this week, with ARRL lawyers crying foul over the FCC's suddenly lax rules when it comes to interference: Specifically, for the first time in decades, the FCC decided against requiring that operations found to cause "harmful interference" be shut down immediately--a stance that ignores the "right of the license holder to be free from interference," . . . The FCC has also withheld portions studies that would "potentially" show BPL does cause harmful interference to other devices--and ignored reports of tests the ARRL argues offer "substantial" evidence of interference problems, [ARRL attorneys] said. FCC attorneys, meanwhile, are arguing that they didn't find ample evidence that BPL posed real potential for "harmful" interference. That probably amuses RF engineers around the world who've well documented the results of BPL interference first hand.
Related:- FCC To Nudge BPL Deployment
- Hams Want FCC To Actually Study BPL Before Praising It
- Broadband Over Powerline (BPL) Stumbles
- Google Voice Ban Is Clear Network Neutrality Violation
- 5 Signs Our Broadband Plan May Already Be In Trouble
- Revolving Door Between Lobbyists, FCC Continues
- What Network Neutrality Is REALLY About
- Cable Industry: Shucks, Guess Nobody Wants CableCARDs
|
 
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Here come the ham bashers.... I can hear it now, all the Amateur radio bashers calling ham radio a "backwards" technology that no one uses anymore. That BPL is the future, and we should all just deal with it.
When power lines go down, phone lines get wiped out by hurricanes, cell towers get overloaded from use, and fiber optic cables melt from wildfires in California, the hams and their "antiquated" technology always seem to get the message out that loved ones are safe.
Amateur radio operators are still a valuable pool of self equipped and experienced communicators proven to be reliable under the harshest of conditions.
BPL is a still impractical application for broadband...
The FCC should let this technology die. It'll never see widespread acceptance..
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
|  | 
lolinternet
@bell.ca
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... It's especially ironic because BPL is the true "backwards" technology. Lets pump our money into making an exact copy of our existing internet access only using Power Lines.
You CAN service rural areas with BPL, BUT you can do it JUST as easily using phone lines. You still need to run fiber out to the middle of nowhere to service 3 people, no matter what technology you use. | |
| | | | | | |
N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
·Verizon FIOS
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... Ya know, you're just up the road from me there in West Chester.
We should grab a beer sometime, or at least set up a sked on a local repeater.
Once I pay my truck off, I plan on saving up and getting my HF gear a little extra "horsepower". I'm not looking to go 1500 PEP, but a nice mid range amp would be nice.
I also have a 1 acre lot with NO deed restrictions. Yep, it's soon to be tower time.
--
Petty people are disproportionably corrupted by petty power… | |
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by N3OGH  :I also have a 1 acre lot with NO deed restrictions. Yep, it's soon to be tower time. Towers are nice. Even better with no deed restrictions.  | |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | ronny_b
join:2004-10-10
Saint Louis, MO
| said by KA3SGM :Ham Bashers like ME !! I'd like to bash the heads of anyone that wants to get their BPL crap within an ITU Region of MY Ham Station. Just fire up a few nice 1.5kw transmissions of SSTV or RTTY around the BPL frequencies in use. Install a few dual winding toroids on your service entrance cables, and modulate RF onto the power companies own lines, just like carrier current broadcasting, use the Power CO's lines as YOUR antenna. A nice 10,000 foot random wire antenna. All of which are illegal. Ron WB0ALI Probably could work EME on 160m AM with that setup.  | |
| | | | | 
KA3SGM
- -... ...- -
Premium
join:2006-01-17
West Chester, PA
clubs:
 ·Cricket Broadband
·Verizon FIOS
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by ronny_b :said by KA3SGM :Ham Bashers like ME !! I'd like to bash the heads of anyone that wants to get their BPL crap within an ITU Region of MY Ham Station. Just fire up a few nice 1.5kw transmissions of SSTV or RTTY around the BPL frequencies in use. Install a few dual winding toroids on your service entrance cables, and modulate RF onto the power companies own lines, just like carrier current broadcasting, use the Power CO's lines as YOUR antenna. A nice 10,000 foot random wire antenna. All of which are illegal. Ron WB0ALI Probably could work EME on 160m AM with that setup. But BPL interference to licensed Ham operations are perfectly legal?? 
I would love to see each BPL engineer even come close to passing the test for a valid Amateur radio license, and lets add the Morse requirements back in, just for fun, at a mere 13 WPM, or better 20 WPM.
Let em' flail in their own $#!t for a while
BPL would be Dead on Arrival because of their engineers being completely incompetent of passing a basic FCC exam, that the subjects of their interference have been already subject to.
Ron, you have an Advanced class Ham ticket as I do, why would anyone bother to seek the legal license anymore if unlicensed operators were to take over complete control of our ham bands.
I did however get to put a 640AM Carrier Current station back on the air at West Chester University, back in 1989.
Quite amazing what distance that 1 watt modulated onto the dormitory power lines can cover.
73, George-KA3SGM
--
"Lithium is no longer available on credit" | |
| | | | expert007
join:2006-01-10
Buffalo, NY | Now there's some talk that ALWAYS captivates the ladies... | |
| | Hellrazor
join:2002-02-02
Abyss | When the power lines go down, so will BPL and the HAMS will be ok
Just kidding.. the FCC is a gov agency, they are always right. | |
| | michigandave
join:2007-05-16
Fenton, MI
 ·Charter Pipeline
·AT&T U-Verse
·AT&T Midwest
| said by N3OGH :When power lines go down, phone lines get wiped out by hurricanes, cell towers get overloaded from use, and fiber optic cables melt from wildfires in California, the hams and their "antiquated" technology always seem to get the message out that loved ones are safe. Amateur radio operators are still a valuable pool of self equipped and experienced communicators proven to be reliable under the harshest of conditions... »gcaresinc.blogspot.com/2007/09/m···rms.html | |
| | wilburyan
join:2002-08-01
| I had the joy of sampling BPL at a hotel a couple of weeks ago... I really have no idea how bad it effects ham radio... but I know the TV in my hotel room was going through all sorts of crazy colors when I started downloading movies with it  | |
| | 
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA | I just don't get it. If powerlines go down as you said, how would BPL then cause interference with emergency HAM communications?
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
| | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by ieolus :I just don't get it. If powerlines go down as you said, how would BPL then cause interference with emergency HAM communications? Like clockwork, this argument comes up every single time.
If BPL does go down in one area, the interference will be gone from just that area. You want to communicate with someone in an unaffected area. If that unaffected area has BPL, and the interference, then how can you hear from someone in the affected area?
| |
| | | |
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... I'm sure it does come up every single time, because that is the first most logical question.
Well, like all politics, it seems you have to weigh to good that BPL would provide versus the good that HAM does provide.
Personally I would rather see some form of BPL, as it is a universal last-mile route into each home in the country.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
| | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by ieolus :I'm sure it does come up every single time, because that is the first most logical question. Not logical at all.
said by ieolus :Well, like all politics, it seems you have to weigh to good that BPL would provide versus the good that HAM does provide. The BPL mantra was they would provide service to rural areas. They don't. They would be viable third pipe. They aren't. They would allow power companies to make money off this internet craze. They aren't.
said by ieolus :Personally I would rather see some form of BPL, as it is a universal last-mile route into each home in the country. It is not. It never will be without major infrastructure changes and a lot of money. | |
| | | | | |
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... I am sorry, but I have to dismiss basically everything you just said in your reply... you come off as 100% biased w/o an open mind.
Of course they don't provide service to rural areas because there isn't any live BPL active (yet).
They most certainly *would* be a viable third pipe if allowed to proceed. How can there be any dispute on that? Basically every home in the country has electric connectivity.
About making money off "this internet craze".. no clue how to respond to that.
As to interference, I hope that can be resolved without affecting the amateur HAM operators. If not, we shall see.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
| | | | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by ieolus :I am sorry, but I have to dismiss basically everything you just said in your reply... you come off as 100% biased w/o an open mind. Translation: I have no argument.
said by ieolus :Of course they don't provide service to rural areas because there isn't any live BPL active (yet). And there never will be because of the costs to deploy the technology. It doesn't have the distance of cable or fiber and has more issues than DSL.
said by ieolus :They most certainly *would* be a viable third pipe if allowed to proceed. How can there be any dispute on that? Basically every home in the country has electric connectivity. Do some research on how BPL is deployed before you bring up the "electricity in every home argument." It is NOT that simple.
said by ieolus :About making money off "this internet craze".. no clue how to respond to that. Cable companies make a lot of profit selling internet service. So do the telephone companies. Power companies are mostly regulated so their profit is fixed for electrical service. Their internet service would not be regulated.
said by ieolus :As to interference, I hope that can be resolved without affecting the amateur HAM operators. If not, we shall see. A North Carolina trial had the power company working with radio operators until it cost to much to mitigate the interference. The power company then said their was no interference and shut the HAM operators out. The trial was shut down after the power company couldn't make the system work.
There are certain BPL systems that do not create interference (like the Motorola system which was o.k.ed by the ARRL) but other systems currently out there have issues and those companies do not want to correct them because it would cost money and eat into their profits. | |
| | | | | | | |
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by moonpuppy :said by ieolus :I am sorry, but I have to dismiss basically everything you just said in your reply... you come off as 100% biased w/o an open mind. Translation: I have no argument. You need to get that chip on your shoulder removed; I'm making no arguments either way... I'm trying to learn about the "controversy". Of course, the more I read your drivel, the more it looks like BPL is the way to go.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
| | | | | | | | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by ieolus :You need to get that chip on your shoulder removed; I'm making no arguments either way... I'm trying to learn about the "controversy". Of course, the more I read your drivel, the more it looks like BPL is the way to go. Pot, this is kettle, you're black.
This topic has been discussed at length multiple times and your arguments are NOTHING new. Just more attacks by someone who does not bother to do any research.
Here is a thread you need to read:
»BPL Standard Advances | |
| | |
Hehe
@ssa.gov
| said by ieolus :I just don't get it. If powerlines go down as you said, how would BPL then cause interference with emergency HAM communications? With interference, the HAM operators may shutdown, sell equipment, and vanish. Why would anyone learn to use HAM if you can't really use it because of interference.
I am not a HAM operator. But I support them and want them to continue to exist. | |
| | |
snorpus2
| The frequencies used by most BPL systems are in the shortwave portion of the radio spectrum, and so can be propagated for hundreds or thousands of miles.
So while electric service (and BPL) could be "out" in a disaster area, communications with and within those areas could be affected by BPL signals coming from, literally, anywhere on Earth.
And I'm not sure, but it might be possible for the electric power to be out in a disaster area, but the BPL signals to still be functioning. | |
| | | |
ieolus
Support The Clecs
join:2001-06-19
Duluth, GA
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... said by snorpus2 :
The frequencies used by most BPL systems are in the shortwave portion of the radio spectrum, and so can be propagated for hundreds or thousands of miles.
So while electric service (and BPL) could be "out" in a disaster area, communications with and within those areas could be affected by BPL signals coming from, literally, anywhere on Earth.
And I'm not sure, but it might be possible for the electric power to be out in a disaster area, but the BPL signals to still be functioning.
I didn't know that, interesting.
--
"Speak for yourself "Chadmaster" - lesopp | |
| | | | | 
wolfox
Gentle Wolfox
join:2002-11-27
Dunnellon, FL
| Re: Here come the ham bashers.... Yes, with as little as 35mW of broadcast power and under the right atmospheric conditions - BPL will be the pop-hum and buzz heard around the world. The very basic nature of the frequencies current trial version of BPL use makes their signal literally bounce and skip through the atmosphere to be heard hundreds if not thousands of miles away. These devices being usually class C or maybe even B FCC devices *must* make right of way and may not interfere with licensed used of the frequency band. However, the FCC seems to be looking the other way while holding its hand out to have a thorough palm greasing. Money talks, little people walk...
--
The RIAA killed my legal webcast. Sadly it will never be mourned... | |
| | | wcmoore
join:2005-08-08
Sterling, VA
| An operator at one end of the conversation will likely be on the working power grid. If he has BPL signals on his electric lines and the signals are interfering he will not be able to hear the distant radio operator. Also another problem is radio signals in the shortwave bands can skip on the ionosphere for thousands of miles causing interference in multiple locations.
As a side note a recent NATO study was released which noted the potential for interference from BPL systems and the threat BPL would pose to military communications. | |
| | | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: ARRL has a big legal obstacle to hurdle said by GOLFnSUN :The ARRL has an uphill battle here in the courtroom. Government regulatory agencies like the EPA, FAA, FCC, SEC, etc are presumed to be the experts and to overcome that presumption the groups suing them have to present overwhelming evidence that the regulatory agency has exceeded their mandate or have made egregious errors. If the evidence presented is inconclusive or conflicting the judge won't substitute his own opinion over that of the government agency. The ARRL could very well still win, but the odds are probably much less than 50%. I think their chances are better since even the GAO slammed the FCC over BPL and how the FCC favored lobbyist over the public in its decision.
quote:
The report calls this discrepancy an "imbalance of information" and says that it "runs contrary to the principles of transparency and equal opportunity." The report also found some issues with how the commission handles confidential information.
»www.wirelessweek.com/article.aspx?id=153874
Yeah, I think a judge will be asking the FCC a few questions about its methods. | |
| | nasadude
join:2001-10-05
Rockville, MD
·Comcast
| said by GOLFnSUN :...Government regulatory agencies like the EPA, FAA, FCC, SEC, etc are presumed to be the experts .... hahahahahahahahaha - that's a good one!
that anyone or any agency of the current government could be "presumed to be the experts" is laughable. Remember, this is the group that wants to "drown the gov't in a bathtub".
and even if there are legitimate experts at the FCC, top management won't let the opinions or work of these people see the light of day.
in addition, anything that goes against big business is a non-starter, no matter how many gov't experts say so. The experts aren't in charge of the govt. | |
| 
jchambers28
join:2007-05-12
Alma, AR | i see a problem if u bypass a trans former how would thees things work on 7 thousand volts lines and up | |
| | 
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA
·RoadRunner Cable
·DSL EXTREME
| Re: i see a problem Most likely just a signal riding on the wire.
I suspect that whatever bypasses the transformer 'reads' the signal on the highend (i.e. 16kV) and passes that signal onto the 240V line and vice versa.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| Piller
join:2006-10-11
Sacramento, CA
1 edit | Could already be causing problems... "Typically home-control power line communications devices operate by modulating in a carrier wave of between 20 and 200 kHz into the household wiring at the transmitter." Wikipedia.
Peeps are already doing this with X10 and INSTEON.
Looks like this operates right in the middle of dsl.
Oops spoke too soon..."PLC modems transmit in medium and high frequency (1.6 to 80 MHz electric carrier)." | |
| | 
MacLeech
The one and only
Premium
join:2001-07-14
SoCal
4 edits | Re: Could already be causing problems... said by Piller :Oops spoke too soon..."PLC modems transmit in medium and high frequency (1.6 to 80 MHz electric carrier)." Right in the requency range used by cable modem upstream data channels....
Good thing cable lines are nowhere near powerlines to pickup the interference that would cause and cable distribution networks are "perfect" closed systems not prone to outside interference...  | |
| | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Could already be causing problems... Cable is sheilded.
I suspect twisted pair (POTS/DSL) may see more interference than Cable.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | |
MacLeech
The one and only
Premium
join:2001-07-14
SoCal
4 edits | Re: Could already be causing problems... said by en102 :Cable is sheilded. I suspect twisted pair (POTS/DSL) may see more interference than Cable. Never seen a device which links the electrical system in your house with the cable system?
Look at your TV, cable box, VCR, cable modem, etc.... how many do you think are designed to prevent cross talk in those frequency ranges when powerlines never used those frequencies before?
Beyond that cable shielding isn't always effective, especially when people are using twist on connectors, bare coax shoved into the coax connector on their TV, dog chewed cable, and all sorts of other dumb things I troubleshoot on a DAILY basis.
ANY time the center conductor on the coax is exposed, ingress is possible. It happens alot more then you may think.
It's a DAILY duty of cable maintenance techs to monitor and fix ingress issues. I already spend enough time tracking down the HAM, CB, and other signals getting into the system.
Having hundreds of miles of unshielded powerline transmitting a signal just a few feet from the cable distribution system in the frequency range used for return communications is guaranteed to cause problems. Good luck trying to find the ingress point when the source follows almost the entire cable distribution system.
Ever read a complaint here on DSLR from a cable user suffering from intermittent connections or packet loss that tech support and local techs can't seem to fix? Alot of those are caused by noise getting into the cable system. | |
| | | | |
en102
Canadian, eh?
join:2001-01-26
Valencia, CA | Re: Could already be causing problems... Yeah - it would have access to noise at the endpoints (devices / unshielded points). I can relate to the poorly done coax connectors.
--
Canada = Hollywood North | |
| | | | | | 
Dude111
An Awesome Dude
Premium
join:2003-08-04
USA
1 edit | This BPL crap has to go.......
I am starting to think they wanna do this ON PURPOSE so we cant enjoy our HF bands anymore!!!!
I talk on 11 meters quite a bit and i dont want it screwed up by this trash!!!! | |
| Ken1943
join:2001-12-30
Brighton, CO
| BPL One has to remember that BPL is an open system. ONE BIG ANTENNA. It will get into anything around depending on the freqencies used. Cable uses a closed system, coax cable. RF almost never gets out. One frequency used by some cable companies was right in the 2 meter Amateur Rado band. I never had a problem, but it was a great way to find a cable leak. Cable companies don't like leaks.
BPL needs to use very high fequencies, over a ghz. But then they would never be able to afford the equipment if it was even possible. | |
| | 
alphapointe
Premium,MVM
join:2002-02-10
Columbia, MO
clubs: | Re: BPL Heh. 145.250, channel 18's carrier. 20 over 9 with a bad leak... | |
| NoOneButMe
join:2001-08-24
TX | Well I think BPL is Stupid Why ? we dont need BPL | |
| | |
See 10 replies to this post | |
lordofwhee
join:2007-10-21
Everett, WA
| FCC... Honestly, the FCC has made so many bad decisions over the past ten years, we may as well not have an FCC. In fact, I'd be willing to bet things would actually be BETTER without an FCC to screw everyone over (except, of course, all the large companies they get kickbacks from). | |
| |
KA3SGM
- -... ...- -
Premium
join:2006-01-17
West Chester, PA
clubs:
2 edits | Re: FCC... BPL=PUKE | |
| 
rob_in_chatt
Premium
join:2004-09-17
Chattanooga, TN
·Comcast
| HAM vs BPL folks, just remember that if and when the next world war occurs, the survivors will be communicating with HAM radio. everything else (means of communication) will be destroyed. HAM has been around for many many years, and it will not be going anywhere. | |
| dcs2281
join:2004-09-14
Santa Clarita, CA
| Shielding BPL isn't the way to go. Maybe next they will try and run tv broadcasts, and telephone over it to. Problem is - the FCC still hasn't addressed how to combat all the interference between the devices they have already approved. Look at some of the devices in your house, and how they interfere with each other. Why not work on shielding electronics properly first, then work on BPL. IMHO you need the shielding to be adequate and force the manufacturers to provide proper shielding. That will never happen, the lobbyist's will get there first. | |
| new2fios
join:2006-07-20
Camillus, NY | Ham bashing Talking about ham bashing (the subject of the first post in this thread), of the 30 comments in the thread there was precisely ONE bashing hams. Every other comment was bashing the FCC and rightfully so. | |
|
Dusty1979
@rr.com
| Catch up on the truth BPL could/would work if there was as much time and effort put INTO it as in trashing it. READ THIS EXCERPT... "Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ expressed appreciation for Motorola's approach to the thorny issue of radio interference from BPL systems. In an effort to minimize interference, particularly to the Amateur Radio bands, Motorola designed its Powerline LV system in close cooperation with the League's technical staff, Sumner noted. A test stand Access BPL system was in operation briefly at ARRL Headquarters. Measurements and subjective listening tests on the ham bands showed that Powerline LV was Amateur Radio-friendly."
The full article can be read here »www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/0···02/?nc=1 | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: Catch up on the truth said by Dusty1979 :BPL could/would work if there was as much time and effort put INTO it as in trashing it. READ THIS EXCERPT... "Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ expressed appreciation for Motorola's approach to the thorny issue of radio interference from BPL systems. In an effort to minimize interference, particularly to the Amateur Radio bands, Motorola designed its Powerline LV system in close cooperation with the League's technical staff, Sumner noted. A test stand Access BPL system was in operation briefly at ARRL Headquarters. Measurements and subjective listening tests on the ham bands showed that Powerline LV was Amateur Radio-friendly." The full article can be read here » www.arrl.org/news/stories/2007/0···02/?nc=1 That's all fine and dandy however, there are still a few systems out there that do not use the Motorola system and cause interference. Those are the systems that are the problem and many refuse to admit there is any interference. | |
| | | 
amigo_boy
join:2005-07-22
Tempe, AZ
·Cox HSI
 ·magicjack.com
| Re: Catch up on the truth said by moonpuppy :That's all fine and dandy however, there are still a few systems out there that do not use the Motorola system and cause interference. Those are the systems that are the problem and many refuse to admit there is any interference. Why not focus on BPL that has been found to work well, and which sought the input of enthusiasts in order to balance competing interests? That seems more constructive the vitriolic remarks that seem to predominate from amateur radio enthusiasts, giving the impression there is *no* room for any BPL? That's not really an honest depiction of the problem nor the league's official position (considering their involvement).
Maybe I missed it. But, I would never have gotten from all the partisanism that the real problem is just *some* BPL. All the comments I've read is that it's an either/or proposition.
You guys should focus more on the positive, accomodating possibilities, not reactionary under siege behavior. (IMO).
Mark | |
|
W1YW
@aol.com
| FCC, Hams Spar I think the nonsense we have seen as feedback to this story fully denotes the absence of both knowledge and appropriate demeanor as espoused by many activist in the amateur radio service.
As a disinterested person; a radio amateur--42 years; an industry professional; and a reasonable person, I believe it is important that the public have a reasonable option in Access BPL. Furthermore, the extant complaints to Part 97 are virtually non-existent; those (very, very few--out of 750,000 hams) that claim the most 'injury' are HF mobile and thus have very limited practical impact.
Access BPL has had virtually no impact on the amateur radio service in the US. There is no reason to believe it ever will.
What this emotional propaganda fests DOES underline is: 'what good is amateur radio'. We hear, again and again, that "WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, AMATEUR RADIO". OK; so where is amateur radio in the apocalytical disaster of the extant California FIRESTORMS?
I am ashamed of those fellow amateurs that have targetted Access BPL with apparently deliberate and focused effort to destroy it. It never USED to be what ham radio was about. But, then again, ham rdio is looking like the old-time disaster of CB radio everyday...
Some of us aren't that way. Don't blame me.
73. | |
| | moonpuppy
join:2000-08-21
Glen Burnie, MD
·Verizon Online DSL
| Re: FCC, Hams Spar said by W1YW :
As a disinterested person; a radio amateur--42 years; an industry professional; and a reasonable person, I believe it is important that the public have a reasonable option in Access BPL. Furthermore, the extant complaints to Part 97 are virtually non-existent; those (very, very few--out of 750,000 hams) that claim the most 'injury' are HF mobile and thus have very limited practical impact.
Access BPL has had virtually no impact on the amateur radio service in the US. There is no reason to believe it ever will. But Main.net's system currently used in Virginia does interfere and has refused to acknowledge any problem.
said by W1YW :
What this emotional propaganda fests DOES underline is: 'what good is amateur radio'. We hear, again and again, that "WHEN ALL ELSE FAILS, AMATEUR RADIO". OK; so where is amateur radio in the apocalytical disaster of the extant California FIRESTORMS? People are on standby. The call hasn't gone out yet.
said by W1YW :
I am ashamed of those fellow amateurs that have targetted Access BPL with apparently deliberate and focused effort to destroy it. It never USED to be what ham radio was about. But, then again, ham rdio is looking like the old-time disaster of CB radio everyday...
Some of us aren't that way. Don't blame me.
73.
No one is targeting Access BPL directly. They are targeting BPL in general which has a pretty abysmal record of acknowledging interference and even worse record of fixing it. Ed Hare has come on here and even gave good marks to the Motorola system the ARRL tested at their HQ.
I guess you also forgot about the 220Mhz fiasco. | |
| |
vatorman
@verizon.net
| »www.youtube.com/watch?v=pdcY0Eetvsw
educate yourself.... watch this its pretty obvious what may happen...
if there is ANY possibility of interferance then it shouldn't be done....as a ham, I'd hate to see this happen. | |
| | | |
SWL
@crnagora.net
| Not just HAM should wake up Its not just HAMs that feel the effects of the RF pollution caused by Broadband Powerline Communication.
It is beyond me, that the ARRL seems to be fighting this alone. Where are the broadcasters, the SWLs, marine services, etc. etc.
AFAIK, the only other organization which seems to be worried is the NATO. See: »ftp.rta.nato.int/public//PubFull···ALL.pdf> | |
| 
spamd
Premium
join:2001-04-22
Rockford, IL
·Insight Communicat..
| Enough is enough!
Man beating a dead horsey. |
| |
|
N2ZD
@mtahq.org
| BPL should be banned Lets face it folks, All of this wonderful technology we enjoy today was either designed or built by hams and then stolen away for commercial use. Sat's,packet,digital voice and picture transmission,frequency hopping etc.. All came about from hams who experimented and worked together to make these technologies work.
If BPL were of any value at all, a ham would have been using it all along. This technology is spectrally dirty, pollutes everyone's airwaves and destroys every communication that can be heard on a normal short wave radio. It is junk science and should be realized as such. It is not needed and we have better and less disruptive forms of high speed internet solutions. | |
|
Justaham
@comcast.net
| BPL The amazing thing is that BPL equipment makers, BPL Service providers, and the FCC are all saying that BPL will bring broadband to rural areas. It can't do that. BPL is a "last mile" technology - it can distribute broadband within a neighborhood, but the broadband has to already be there (by fiber optic, satellite, or other non-BPL technology) before BPL can be used to deliver it to the homes. If broadband is already available in the rural town, who needs BPL? There are other, better technologies for the last mile delivery.
This fact has been pointed out numerous times, yet the FCC keeps praising BPL for it potential to deliver broadband to rural customers. | |
| |
Dusty1979
@rr.com
| Re: BPL Being the super intelligent all knowing ppl that hammers claim to be, you already know that DSL is only available if your are within a few miles of a phone terminal. What is it you don't understand about the word rural? Rural = to far out to get dsl or cable and there is usually no fiber. As for satellite, have you ever priced it. Way out of the competitive arena and nowhere as fast as the newer BPL technologies. My RURAL landline hooks up at 26400k. Satellite at best is 200k up and 1.5M down for $99.99 per month plus $300 for the equipment. If you can get DSL, the speeds are usually down at 1.5 to 2 Meg and up at about 128k. Not exactly high speed. Most BPL projects are currently around $20 to $30 monthly. BPL is showing 4Meg up and down with there newest stuff.
I saw the you tube clip above. He was driving around finding interference. BPL isn't the only thing that causes interference. Let me get close to his car with my bad spark plug wires and then listen to his radio hum to the tune of my ignition. Hammers keep talking about when/if there is an emergency they are there. I agree but the use of base stations is needed, not some joker in his car. Come on into the 21 century and try to help with those super brains of yours instead of hindering and being afraid of change. I also read where guys are saying they will get big power amps and cause interference with the BPL. Thats good thinking but why would that be better than fixing BPL to work along side hams like the ARRL has said they have seen it? | |
| plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA
·Charter Pipeline
| Geeky Hams Okay. Let's make this point abundantly clear. Ham radio operators are some of the original electronics geeks. How many people were fooling around with electronics in the 1920's and 30's? Nearly all of the basic radio theory work that holds up the wireless spectrum we know and love today was done either by hams, or by guys fooling around with radio before there was such a thing as a "ham". So hams have been united by a desire to be on the cutting edge since THE TURN OF LAST CENTURY.
So tell me... in a group of people constantly striving to be more technologically advanced... why would we be opposed to a technology that would legitimately bring us better/faster internet service?
Oh, that's right- because it's NOT WORTH IT. It's cost-per-home-passed is about equivalent to DSL, and DSL doesn't make shortwave radio impossible. If you wanted to bring access to everyone, everyone has phone lines. Deploy RT's and get it done with.
I hear rumors of BPL in my neighborhood. 1.5KW amp, here I come.
73 DE AE6YD | |
|
UK BPL
@co.uk
| Help me with this please. Lets pretend that I'm an executive looking to introduce BPL technology in the UK.
There are a number of important differences between the UK utilities market and the market in the USA.
The UK energy industry is largely deregulated and competitive.
The distribution companies(own pipes and wires) are heavily regulated but the retail market is competitive and perhaps more importantly so is the metering/energy services market.
The UK electricity network has on average 150-200 premises fed from each transformer.
We also have telecommunications Local Loop Unbundling (LLU), which means that private licenced telecoms companies can put their own equipment into telephone exchanges and "adopt" the national carrier (BT) telephone lines.
The utilities companies can be persuaded to install "BPL junction boxes" where we will insert the telecoms signal into the medium voltage (MV) line below the transformer and will automatically light up every electric socket in those 150-200 premises with high-speed broadband.
Another important development that feeds into this are the likelihood that the UK utilities market is going to mandate "smart meters" for all energy end-points and will therefore need communications to and from every meter.
The distribution companies have for some time now been replacing the earth wires on their network with a cable that contains a 24/48 core fibre cable for back-haul.
We intend implementing a IEEE P1901 standards based solution that uses OFDM with automatic interference detection and notching.
We see our solution as being the catalyst for helping to change the energy industry from a pure commodity based market with very poor levels of usage data, into a value-added energy services industry that provides real-time information on the actual energy being used at the time it is used. This will allow policy makers, companies and end-users to adjust their behaviour in order to impact on peak usage and climate change issues.
As a responsible corporate executive I want to establish the benefits of this technology in such a way that I don't adversely impact the current users of the radio spectrum to any great extent but if the law and the regulators allow, I'm going to make this work.
What do I need to do to ensure that we co-exist with the radio hams? | |
| | | |
|
|
ARRL has a big legal obstacle to hurdle