Princeton IL Completes BPL Network

If this works maybe finally BPL will get off the ground. And Ham radio operators can live with BPL ( if it really works ). Sure hope so. Time will tell if Ham radio's have interference in all states if it really does get implemented.

well - I live about 30 miles from Princeton and the hams that I know there are complaining. Seems that they have experienced interference and as with most of the other BPL trials it has been swept under the table by the FCC.

BS and who cares. God why are we catering to a very very very small less than 1% group of people? that's why t takes forever for technology to advance becaus every single group that might complain has to be sattisfied which is IMPOSSIBLE. The needs of the many outweigh the needs of the few. Ham operators can find a new hobby.

Umm... Because if this were done on a large scale, it'd effect a lot more than 1 percent. Still, ham operators are probably the minority but this technology just sucks. Find better ways to give internet if you ask me. Wimax for one or satellite via the balloons sounds more feasible.

BPL SUCKS !!!!!

HAM radio is too important to just make the "little HAM radio geeks" go away. It's very useful in the event of a major catastrophic emergency... You know, like hurricanes, large fires, earthquakes, major brown outs, terrorist attacks, etc... 10 years ago I would have laughed at the odds of having 3 of the events happening near the same time, but living through many of them, has changed that thought. You can speak to people very far away with very little power. I think it's stupid to just tell them to go away.
I don't use HAM radio, but for me it is like having a backup plan to communicate across distances in case some other major infrastructure is "fubared". BPL, sounds like crap... If it works and doesn't mess with HAM radio, give it a try, oterhwise it shouldn't be used.

It's all relative. Hobbyists sacrifice the quality of their frequencies in the name of personal enjoyment and expanding their participants. A good example is eliminating morse code. 10 years ago the argument for retaining it is exactly the same argument used today against BPL. It was the only thing that could reliably communicate in an emergency (when your microphone is damaged, etc.). It communicates in a smaller band with less power. Etc., etc. And, without it, the riff-raff would get licenses and the hobby hands would sound like CB.

But, it went by the wayside. Now you have people using more power than is required to communicate. Just talking over others. Etc.

Which bands does BPL affect? HF only? It sounds like it because people say the problem with BPL is propagation. But, I'm not sure.

Mark

BPL affect more than just HAM radio. It affects frequencies up to 80Mhz.

Please do some more research before you spout off what you clearly know nothing about.

Ok, but what I was getting at is: why can't higher frequencies be used for the stated "emergency services" which hobby frequencies are supposed to be protected for?

Mark

Do you even know what occupies the HF spectrum? It runs the gamut from commercial operators all the way to the military. Try telling the military they have to move. Add to that, we as taxpayers have to pay higher taxes for all government and military users to swap out all their radios with new ones. That won't be cheap.

And don't think you can confine BPL just to the HAM radio sections because it is not enough space.

Try again.

One question at a time please. That's not what I asked. Why can't higher frequencies be used for the emergency services which we're told is the benefit of hobby radio?

Mark

That question directly relates to your question. Moving everyone up will cost billions. It is not just amateur radio that would need to move.

As the frequency goes up, the distance goes down. Long range communications are possible in HF and not so much in VHF or higher.

Relays and nets? It's all relative, right?

Mark

Nope, it is not. Again, you know nothing of what you are talking about. A relay is only as good as the furthest distance it can reach. As it stands now, HF is the ONLY set of frequencies that can cover this country. Not 50Mhz nor anything higher in the amateur spectrum. VHF is line of sight which becomes extremely difficult in mountainous regions. You do realize we have mountains in this country right?

That's why there could be a mixture of VHF hobbyists and satellite services.

Mark

A mobile unit cannot communicate with a satellite easily. HF can be made mobile very easily.

Plus, anytime you start mixing frequencies and modes, you lose reliability of communication and it becomes a bad game of "telephone."

Until you do a bit more research, you won't understand how radio communications work.

As I said, I never had a problem with my Iridium phone.

Mark

But you fail to realize the extended costs. The service costs monthly even if it is not used. Currently, the military does not pay for spectrum and neither does public service. Again, how much more in taxes are you willing to spend for this conversion?

Now, you also forget the millions needed to put up even more satellites for all these new phones that have to go out to everyone. Who is going to maintain them? NASA? Even more millions in repairs if they need to fix them. XM Radio paid $15 million for their sats and 2 have failed.

Again, not more than the price of an M16.

Mark

And again, it costs much more than that.

Until you are willing to open up that pocketbook of yours, this change will not happen and it won't be cheap.

And again, you have no idea of the comparative costs. I think what's being established is that you're so biased by your hobby that you're unable to see the validity of *any* reasonable compromise.

Remember, the number of purchased Iridium phones would be much less than the number of M16s. It's not like they'd be issued to every soldier. And, they wouldn't require the special security oversight inherent with weapons (and the public safety issues which arise due to their theft).

I could insult you by saying "try again" or "you need to study more before...". But, I feel no need to since I'm mot a partisan.

Mark

You are partisan. You can't see past your point of view.

And again, you still have no clue how communications work.

Here is a simple thing for you to consider. Why do public service people use radios instead of cell phones? When you can answer that question, you will understand why sat phones are a very bad idea.

As for security issues with dolling out weapons, you would know that all communication equipment goes through similar security measures especially since most have cryptographic additions that are more HIGHLY controlled than any personal weapons.

Keep trying.

Aren't you comparing apples to oranges? Why would satellite phones for use during rare emergencies require encrypted communications? They would only be used to augment hobbiests' VHF nets (which aren't encrypted).

Mark

Military communications are 90% encrypted. They even use a separate frequency for their air traffic control and use the civilian frequencies only when they are in civil airspace. Almost every single radio they have in their inventory has to have encryption capabilities. That's how they work.

Now answer the question I posted earlier.

"Why do public service people use radios instead of cell phones?"

Non sequitur. We're talking about augmenting the 30 hobbyists who participated after the Washington floods if they are unable to form nets with 2 meter and 70 cm. Remember? It's not for any other use.

Mark

Wrong, the military has specs that need to be met for equipment to be considered. Encryption is one of them. You brought up why not let the military take charge. Well, they need communications that can be encrypted.

And keep ducking the question I asked. Here it is again.

"Why do public service people use radios instead of cell phones?" Here is a clue: cell phones are cheaper per unit but they still use radio...why?

who cares about ham radio, emergency services and military- they can be moved to a different spectrum. BPL and the internet is way more important then that crap, out with the old in with the new. we'll put you ham radio guys in a museum

More rantings from a little child who knows not what he is talking about.

Over a period of time and numerous threads concerning BPL, amigo child has proved that he knows nothing. He has an irrational dislike for amateur radio, for what reason, who knows. It is pointless to discuss anything with him.

Yep, he is just trolling. He has no clue on how radio communications work. Furthermore, he has no idea how the military procures equipment and how some specs are non-negotiable.

He has done the research, or at least read all of the responses to the same old argument he keeps posting. No matter what is said in response, he keeps repeating that mantra ad nauseum.

Ed, W1RFI

Nice callsign. I like it!

Well, if such a thing DOES happen, then there won't be any "interference" because the BPL service will be down. I'm tired of hearing the same old argument "HAM is too important in a catastrophe". Bottom line... if everything is down and won't work and we have to rely on HAM radio to communicate, then there's not going to be anything interfering now is there?!

I'll put money on there being more hams now than there would ever be rural broadband customers served by BPL even without the technical restrictions. So I agree, why are we catering to a very very very small less than 1% group of people? A group even smaller than the three quarters of a million amateur radio operators in the US alone. Considering that there are multiple, better ways to get relatively slow broadband access to people BPL is at best a bad technology.

Have these hams contact me, as I would like more firsthand reports. For the most part, the 2nd generation BPL equipment has been shown to be better than the first generation, but ARRL has little experience with Main.net G2 equipment. I sent an email today to the BPL operator, and got back an immediate response and an indication that he will work with me or local hams as needed. If there is interference from the present implementation of the system, we all need to have it on the table.

The article was inaccurate in that there were interference reports from the earlier implementation, but unless we do get reports from hams in the area, or reports of widespread mobile interference, the conclusion will be that the system is operating without major interference problems.

Ed Hare
ARRL
225 Main St
Newington, CT 06111
Tel: 860-594-0318
Email: W1RFI@arrl.org

F* the hams! The more I read about the FCC and the ARRL, the more I think that they are both wholly-owned subsidiaries of T and VZ.

I suspect that BPL technology works well enough and that the telecorps obviously don't want more competition.

If I hear one more ham bashing moron I think I'm going to scream. Most, if not all, wireless technology got its' start in ham radio. Your cell phone? Hams came up with the technology, WLANs stem from packet radio data networks created by hams, and don't even get me started about the emergency communications.

BPL is marketing-induced shit that the FCC needs to get rid of, and if the engineers were still running things like they did 20 years ago, it wouldn't be allowed to cause all this interference. But the politicos are in charge, and only care about lining their pockets.

Sigh

I think I'll go talk to someone 5000 miles away running 1 watt. Sounds like more fun than listening to JAWS spew this crap.

KC0--Z (Callsign obscured for privacy) - Ham operator for 13 years.

Well - it's Sunday and the "Mental Midgets" have nothing better to do with their time so what do you expect?

One other thing - there is a relatively new technology out that does seem to very peacefully coexist with the other services - not just hams but most importantly public service (that's Fire/Police/Rescue) for our mentally challenged friends. Now - if the folks who have BPL deployed would just use this technology then everyone would benefit.

Boeing has expressed concern to the FCC about BPL interference to long distance airline communication. That's an unlicensed service interfering with a critical licensed service. That's enough for me.

The public electric company spent millions to install this:
»15 customers is hardly a good test
and the low rate of customers doesn't speak well to such a large expenditure of tax dollars.

Data Source: »en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pr ··· Illinois

The fact of the matter is the vast majority of BPL devices installed do not cause harmful interference to the ham bands. Current Communications has the largest number of commercial deployments; they use HomePlug-based technology which even the ARRL says does not cause them interference:

»www.arrl.org/tis/info/pd ··· 7088.pdf

quote:

---

Although the Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) controversy wasn’t addressed in the FCC discussions, I
did note the presence of the HomePlug Powerline Alliance at the show. This is a group of nearly 80 international
market leaders involved in the use of ac power lines for delivering not only power, but also Internet access and networking, which includes BPL..."Over the past 7 years, even though there are over 6 million HomePlug devices deployed, ARRL does not have a single report of harmful interference to Amateur Radio involving HomePlug products. If the entire BPL industry could follow their lead and formally do what HomePlug has determined needs to be done, interference from BPL could become a manageable problem.”

---

Of course the problem is not every equipment provider has followed that "lead"; a small number of highly publicized trials have used "rogue" equipment that interferes, and instead of working with groups like ARRL to solve the problem, they hire lawyers and lobbyists.

Um what it is that HAMS are complaining about ONE "AMBIANT" Tech. They are the dirtiest one and they dont care look at the one area that the F.C.C. don't even enforce anything upon because they are getting paid off by that large power company to allow them to continue to do this. There is a BPL that does work. Motorola has come out with a BPL tech that works and doesn't interfere with the frequencies between 2-80MHz.

If anything if this goes nationwide you will see complaints but you will also see it is one BPL provider. If everywhere gets FTTH it will make BPL look useless and slow. But that cost too much to install. Why is it everyone wants this? Because they cannot afford broadband via sat,DSL, Cable? Or they are too cheap. They dont care about anyone but themselves this also includs the Ambiant provider. All they see is profits for a cheap tech that don't work. What is everyone gonna do when the grid goes down? No BPL, No power and if the HAMS are gone, there is no phones due to no power after thier generators go down because they are out of fuel, no cell no nothing, because there is no power. And all the Hams are gone because of BPL. Then what?

What? I bet no one can awnser that. Ham ops provides emergency communications when all is down during storms. Remember Katrina? FEMA took too long to provide emergency communications/services but the HAMS were there immidately.

BEFORE you all knock the small minoroity, remember what they have done for the communities effected by devistating storms, the black-out in the Northeast US, hams were there, when the land/cellphones were overloaded beacuse of 9-11 the hams were there. When a earthquake takes out a large area of California, the hams were there doing voluenteer work and allowing loved ones to get word to their loved ones around the nation and the WORLD that they are OK. Will BPL do this when the power is OFF? No. But Hams can. We don't require commerical power to do what we do. But BPL requires commerical power to work.

No one thinks about this, Many are too blind by either greed, or are sheep who follows what certain people tell them and don't QUESTION. This isn't limited to BPL this is all over the US and the world. We blindly follow our leaders and don't question their methods, espeically when alot of innocent people die as the result of being told this is the right thing to do. In the case of BPL, they blind those who want internet fast and cheap and don't care who they effect I am suprised that the military isn't all over them too because hams only uses a small sliver of what BPL uses, military uses the majority of what BPL uses. And yet BPL is still active. I drove thru a BPL area and I lost everything including CB Radio. What if I got hurt? Cellphone is down no payphone near by and no cb radio or ham radio to call for help because one of the bpl users is downloading the latest illigal movie or script or heaven forbid lewd stuff.

Think about the lil people. Think about what if you are in a accident, and your cellphone dont work no other means of telling someone? And you have a CB in your car but you can't hear the other person because of BPL? Would you complain? YES you would. The main concern of the whole thing is EMERGENCY COMMUNICATIONS rather it be traffic or you tring to get medical aid.

BPL is not the way to go at LEAST in its current form. HAMS are NOT againt BPL as a whole, just the current way it is. It can work and MOTOROLA proved it with using Low Voltage Lines instead of the Medium Voltage Lines.

Think about it..

Dude, they are not gonna do FTTH everywhere. The copper in the ground will completely dissolve before ATT goes that route. And quit waving the flag of hams being the savior when a storm hits.. WE could use satellite communications for those calls if things where allowed.. But that would probably offend a ham op somewhere in a swamp that use's the very frequency of that service.. Hell, lets just go back to smoke signals....

There are a number of problems with BPL, which is a bad solution for broadband Internet. A demonstration project was built not too far from us and was a terrible failure because it never came close to achieving the promised speeds because of interference problems, both from -and- to the service.

Also, in addition to creating ruinous interference to amateur radio communications, it also wreaks havoc on shortwave radio broadcasters, long distance air traffic communications, military HF communications circuits, some analog ship-to-shore communications, and broadcasters in the mediumwave (AM radio) spectrum.

When your technology deploys a broad-band radio signal over a huge amount of radio spectrum over unshielded cables, that has the potential to simply wipe out entire bands of spectrum for licensed users. FCC regulations have always demanded that new applications utilizing the frequency spectrum it regulates should not wreak havoc with other licensed users. Unfortunately, lobbying cash can speak louder than common sense.

Additionally, when a 500kw shortwave radio transmitter fires up for its international broadcasts, it can also create interference to the BPL service (as can any local broadcaster).

BPL has been touted since the 1980s as a broadband application, around the same time Al Haig was proposing floating broadband blimps over major cities. Neither application made much sense because newer technology became available which delivered quality service with fewer costs and complications.

Power companies in some cities maintain extensive fiber networks, and some of those can be dual-purposed into providing broadband communications. Wide area wireless and wi-fi networks can deliver a reasonable signal in many communities without these complexities. And some newer generation BPL technologies work in frequency ranges which do not wipe out the shortwave and mediumwave bands. All these are far better options than a bootstrapped technology that has come to this party too late with a flawed technology model. Let's throw this baby out with the bathwater before communities are suckered into signing contracts with the companies building them.

exactly, it's not only hams. Everyone thinks that hams are bitching for no reason, but the interference affects a lot of people in general. Seriously, when a new, supposedly "revolutionary" technology causes such havoc, and there's superior stuff out there already, why get such headaches?

I have the same question of BPL as I do for all of these supposed revolutions for rural broadband- why is this better than current technologies for this application? The main advantage I can see is that some places that have municipal power networks could build this somewhat cheaper. (But that doesn't factor in comparative costs of deployment of equipment)

Would my x10 light switches cause problems?

I've seen claims that the US has 60% broadband penetration, the problem is most rural areas are stuck with very slow dial-up connections. BPL or even wimax could bring a real connection to virtually everyone. considering the power lines are already ran to 99% of the US BPL is a very great solution. Any interference issues can be worked out, and if not Broadband is MUCH more important than any HAM communications.
I find all the dismissive attitudes toward this technology funny, most of you are probably writing from your DSL or cable connections & could care less that over half the US isn't able to enjoy what you already have. we wonder why were falling behind in the world, its because we are holding onto antiquated tech(HAM) instead of giving BPL the push that it needs to get everyone Highspeed internet.

What I find funny is that you think BPL will cover rural areas. Why hasn't it happened?

Cost. Plain and simple. The same reason cable, DSL and fiber won't hit rural areas is because of the cost per household. You set one central point in a neighborhood, you have a good chance of serving a bunch of people from one central location.

For rural deployment, you need to pass a few houses and while some may take it, many will not. How much does it cost to pass a house to get to the next subscriber?

BPL has many of the same shortfalls. Just because you have a power line doesn't mean you can get BPL. It is MUCH more involved than that. Just because you have phone service doesn't mean you can get DSL.

To run BPL to rural areas, a fairly expensive BPL repeater on the line is needed every 1000-2000 feet, typically. IBEC, a BPL manufacturer, is making some inroads into rural areas, selling to cooperatives that are securing RUS loans to fund the installation.

But the premise that the wires run everywhere so BPL is cheap doesn't hold up. Most of the utilities that have abandonded BPL have cite the economic aspects of BPL as the primary reason.

Ed Hare