Home |
Search |
Today's Posts |
#31
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message .com... Well interference caused by hams will be small potatoes compared to the power that some of the commercial broadcasters are allowed to use. That will compromise BPL over a much larger area than any ham station ever could. If BPL ever comes to my area, I'm within a few hundred yards of some of these broadcasters so the BPL users will never even notice my signal since they'll be constantly torn up by the commercial stuff. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I expect the BPLers would trap the broadcast frequencies. If the interference from established broadcasters is still too high, they simply won't offer service in that neighborhood. But I don't think RF is the biggest problem for BPL. Overhead power lines will only intercept a small percentage of the RF, and re-radiate at least half of that. I think noise sources plugged directly into the power line are going to cause far more problems. Frank Dresser |
#32
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]() "Frank Dresser" wrote in message ... "Dee D. Flint" wrote in message .com... Well interference caused by hams will be small potatoes compared to the power that some of the commercial broadcasters are allowed to use. That will compromise BPL over a much larger area than any ham station ever could. If BPL ever comes to my area, I'm within a few hundred yards of some of these broadcasters so the BPL users will never even notice my signal since they'll be constantly torn up by the commercial stuff. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE I expect the BPLers would trap the broadcast frequencies. If the interference from established broadcasters is still too high, they simply won't offer service in that neighborhood. But I don't think RF is the biggest problem for BPL. Overhead power lines will only intercept a small percentage of the RF, and re-radiate at least half of that. I think noise sources plugged directly into the power line are going to cause far more problems. Frank Dresser Could very well be. If one of the neighbors has welding equipment, that can really put a lot of noise onto an electrical line. It takes a lot of filtering to keep that out of your radio and no doubt would do a good job of interfering with the Internet signal. Dee D. Flint, N8UZE |
#33
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Capt. Carl would you please make BPL go away like you did the real Hams.
Thank you. 10-73's! |
#34
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.
Frank Dresser wrote: "Walter Treftz" wrote in message ... Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a vertical- radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots of QSO's, and have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice about it. Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting. N4GL Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago? I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference. But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics turns into a numbers game. How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to count. Frank Dresser |
#35
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.
Frank Dresser wrote: "Walter Treftz" wrote in message ... Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a vertical- radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots of QSO's, and have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice about it. Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting. N4GL Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago? I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference. But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics turns into a numbers game. How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to count. Frank Dresser |
#36
![]() |
|||
|
|||
![]()
Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.
Frank Dresser wrote: "Walter Treftz" wrote in message ... Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a vertical- radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots of QSO's, and have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice about it. Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting. N4GL Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago? I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference. But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics turns into a numbers game. How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to count. Frank Dresser |
Reply |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|