|
New to Ham Radio?
My Profile
Community
Articles
Forums
News
Reviews
Friends Remembered
Strays
Survey Question
Operating
Contesting
DX Cluster Spots
Propagation
Resources
Calendar
Classifieds
Ham Exams
Ham Links
List Archives
News Articles
Product Reviews
QSL Managers
Site Info
eHam Help (FAQ)
Support the site
The eHam Team
Advertising Info
Vision Statement
About eHam.net
|
Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
from
ARRL
on
March 28, 2006
Website:
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2006/03/28/3/
View comments about this article!
Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
See the full story here:
LINK
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by K2JVI on March 28, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Thank goodness!!
Interesting to note that APS is looking at trying this in Phoenix, all I have to say is good luck considering all of the broadband options in the metro Phoenix area.
The market place is going to crush BPL, and it's starting to happen.
"Network with class-do it with glass"
73's
|
| |
|
RE: Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by W1RFI on March 29, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Actually, it remains to be seen whether APS will pursue this or not, and Phoenix really is speculation, not fact. It would make sense for them to be a bit closer to their engineering staff than they were in Cottonwood.
Mitsubishi was working on using notching better to address the interference reports, and the hams in Cottonwood were encouraged by that. Of course, they had just gone through months of working with APS and MTI on the G1 technology in use there, so we really can't blame them for being glad they didn't have to do that all over again.
I didn't get a chance to complete my review of the article before it went to press or I would have noted that Mitubishi has been having regular communications with me about EMC issues. I do expect that we will get to work with them in some of their mid-state NY systems. They are using DS2 200 Mb/s chipsets and the improved notching capability of the ICs should let the do better than the results seen right after the 200 Mb/s equipment was installed in Cottonwood.
Ed, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on March 29, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"MTI indicated to him on March 14 that it had some new chipsets offering more bandwidth but, given various technical roadblocks it had encountered in Cottonwood, was considering shifting the site of its BPL experiments to the Phoenix area, where MTI is headquartered".
Once again, ONLY economics can kill BPL. If it is not competitive, it will die a natural capitalistic death. Let's hope that technical issues make it economically non-viable.
W9WHE
|
| |
|
Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by N0XMZ on March 29, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
My favorite part of the story was:
"Not only did amateurs determine the system was generating interference on the high end of 20 meters and elsewhere, Shipton reported, VVARA showed that it could "break" the system's datastream while running as little as 65 watts from a mobile station."
The sad thing is, they're just moving it to Phoenix. I hardly consider this a victory. More like a lost battle for a warrior who's going back to base to regroup and fight another day.
The worst part is, no matter how much the ARRL or individual hams complain about BPL interference, the FCC does NOTHING. I am amused by the number of letters the FCC sends to electric companies to fix interference problems coming from powerlines (arcing, etc.) in response to a ham's complaint. The letter always cites the "incidental radiator". Yet NEVER does the FCC cite a BPL provider when complaints are filed. The hypocrisy!
|
| |
|
RE: Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by W1RFI on April 2, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
> The sad thing is, they're just moving it to Phoenix.
> I hardly consider this a victory. More like a lost
> battle for a warrior who's going back to base to
> regroup and fight another day.
It is not at all certain that APS or MTI will continue to pursue BPL. They chose to decommission the trial in Cottonwood and, from what I have been told, they are essentially starting with a clean slate and could look at other BPL companies. If they do, it is likely that they will select a different location, for a number of reasons (closer to their engineering staff; the hams in Cottonwood were pretty proactive about interference, etc.)
> The worst part is, no matter how much the ARRL or
> individual hams complain about BPL interference, the
> FCC does NOTHING. I am amused by the number of
> letters the FCC sends to electric companies to fix
> interference problems coming from powerlines
> (arcing, etc.) in response to a ham's complaint. The
> letter always cites the "incidental radiator". Yet
> NEVER does the FCC cite a BPL provider when
> complaints are filed. The hypocrisy!
The power-line cases are being handled by the FCC Enforcement Bureau under a cooperative agreement between ARRL and the FCC. Behind most of those letters are tens of hours of ARRL staff time, although FCC can and does handle a few directly on its own. Riley often refers initial inquiries to Mike Gruber in the ARRL Lab.
BPL is not being handled by the Enforcement Bureau at this point, but by the Office of Engineering and Technology. I will speculate a bit that BPL complaints will ultimately be turned over to EB, but probably kept in the DC offices.
The FCC did mandate to the City of Manassas and COMTek that they make measurements of the BPL system there and correct any harmful interference.
The disagreements often stem over just what constitutes harmful interference. In Manassas, amateurs that operate mobile in the area have filed complaints. The FCC has asked them to explain their routine presence in the area where they complaint interference occurred. In other areas that are not city-wide deployments, but are smaller technical trials, amateurs have intentionally driven into the area to assess interference, with the intent of learning and reporting what will happen when the system is made larger. BPL operators have deemed those complaints "frivolous" and claim the only reason there is interference is that hams went looking for interfernece that would not otherwise exist.
IMHO, they miss the point, or misrpresent it.
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on April 6, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
N0XMZ wrote:
"The worst part is, no matter how much the ARRL or individual hams complain about BPL interference, the FCC does NOTHING"
Only economics can kill BPL.
If you think the impotent arrl can do it, you are a sad victim of arrl propiganda. 700,000 hobbyists cannot stand in the way of a potential benifit to 300 million. HOWEVER, if it is economically non-viable, then IT WILL DIE a natural capitalistic death. Let us hope that BPL is not competitive.
|
| |
|
RE: Arizona BPL Field Trial Ends:
|
|
|
by W9WHE-II on April 6, 2006
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W1RFI wrote:
"In Manassas, amateurs that operate mobile in the area have filed complaints. The FCC has asked them to explain their routine presence in the area where they complaint interference occurred".
Could it be that FCC has seen right through attempts to artificially "gin up" BPL complaints? Naaahhhh everybody but arrl is just stupid!
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Other News Articles
Student Sends MIT Letter to Space:
Amateur Radio Club Talks to Hams Worldwide on Centennial:
New Communication Exhibit Helps Kids Get the Message:
Transmission of Images - No Internet, Satellite, Cable, or Cells Needed!
Deltona Youth Loves to Ham It Up on the Radio:
|
|
|
