"recalcitrant ham op" wrote in message
...

"opcom" wrote in message
...
This was posted to ARLI, I don't know how many
subscribe, but in spite of the numerous comments
against BPL (transmitting wideband internet data
over power lines, which will destroy the HF radio
spectrum), the FCC seems disposed to encourage
it anyway. evil! evil! just look up BPL on the web. T
the noise from the radiated signals trashed the ham bands thoroughly.

I guess you never heard that money talks and bull**** walks eh?

Did you *REALLY THINK* that a couple hundred
aging HF operating tightwad ham radio operators
are going to stop an emerging technology that will
conceivably network home appliances to the internet
and be worth $BILLIONS$ in potential revenue ??

Jeezehus-H-christ...get F-N real !!


Get your facts straight. There are 300,000+ hams licensed to operate HF and
another 300,000+ hams licensed in the VHF and higher only category. Note
that BPL will also trash 6meters and 2meters.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...


The transmission lines are radiators. As such they will also receive.

Power lines are right up next to the rigs. The RF from the radios will
trash the BPL. Probably by causing drop outs and adding lots of extra
delays. Basically it will make BPL useless anywhere near a ham station.

Dan/W4NTI



OK, let's say it does slow or even stop BPL near a ham station. Why
wouldn't the FCC restrict amatuer operations around BPL areas?



Right now and under the new power level proposal, BPL must meet Part 15.
This means that it legally cannot cause interference to any authorized or
licensed radio service and must accept interference from any authorized or
licensed radio service. Therefore any problems in BPL must be resolved on
the BPL side under current regulations. It would require changes in both
Part 15 and Part 97 to restrict operations around BPL areas. Plus don't
forget the non-ham spectrum users. The FCC will have a heck of a time
telling commercial AM radio, FM radio, and over-the-air TV broadcasters to
shut down.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE

"Dee D. Flint" wrote in message
.com...


Right now and under the new power level proposal, BPL must meet Part 15.
This means that it legally cannot cause interference to any authorized or
licensed radio service and must accept interference from any authorized or
licensed radio service. Therefore any problems in BPL must be resolved on
the BPL side under current regulations. It would require changes in both
Part 15 and Part 97 to restrict operations around BPL areas.

Yes, that's the question. If a currently legal amatuer radio operator could
shut down high speed internet access for a given area, is there any reason
the FCC couldn't change it's current regulations, and put in new
restrictions on amateur radio?


Plus don't
forget the non-ham spectrum users. The FCC will have a heck of a time
telling commercial AM radio, FM radio, and over-the-air TV broadcasters to
shut down.

Dee D. Flint, N8UZE


I'm sure the FCC wouldn't restrict any of that. The TV networks, radio
networks and all the people who watch and listen won't let them.

Frank Dresser

"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

"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

Capt. Carl would you please make BPL go away like you did the real Hams.

Thank you.

10-73's!

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

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

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