200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
Ray Soifer (W2RS)
on
August 15, 2003
View comments about this article!
In 1912, Congress limited amateurs and other "private stations" to wavelengths below 200 meters (frequencies above 1.5 MHz), where they would not be able to cause damage to Naval and commercial stations operating above 200 meters according to the prevailing technology of that era.
In 2003, FCC has proposed to authorize BPL in the 2-80 MHz range, and Wi-Fi at 5470-5725 MHz. WRC-03 has allocated that band to Wi-Fi on a primary basis. According to the Central States VHF Society, BPL emissions are likely to produce harmonics well into the lower UHF bands. A similar result is likely for Wi-Fi at 2.4 and 5.4 GHz.
Except for those amateurs lucky enough to live in rural areas, that would leave 160m, perhaps 23cm, and the upper microwave bands (perhaps 24 GHz and above) as the only places U.S. amateurs can operate free from interference caused by the "national information infrastructure." If you live outside the U.S., "this picture is coming to a theatre near you."
There's an eerie similarity in that: "Top Band" was our principal refuge in 1912 as well. The difference is that short waves, 3.5-30 MHz plus VHF and lower UHF, open to amateurs then, will be functionally useless now if FCC has its way.
What can you do about this? Reply Comments in the BPL matter, ET Docket 03-104, are open through August 20th. Comments in the 5 GHz Wi-Fi matter, ET Docket 03-122, are open through September 3rd, with Reply Comments open through September 23rd.
For more information on how you can file comments or reply comments, go to http://www.arrl.org.
73,
Ray, W2RS
w2rs@amsat.org
w2rs@arrl.net
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Does this mean that WWV becomes null and void in the USA?
Maybe they could lend some weight to help push BPL into a dark corner somewhere.
Do shortwave listeners have rights?
What about the VOA ? What about other Foreign Governments that broadcast Short wave into the USA?
I find it rather ironic that the FCC has for many years helped clean up the HF spectrum from pirate stations and alike..Now they are wanting to help Destroy the whole HF spectrum.
I thought the FCC role was to preserve a natural non renewable resource for all, not destroy it with something akin to a Country wide spark gap transmitter.
If this takes hold in the U.S it will then be used as a yardstick to get it pushed into every other country in the World.
This should be an international effort to stop this blatant rape and pilage of a Natural resource that can be best served by using more appropriate technological means.
|
| |
|
RE: Non-USA Amateurs FCC Reply Comments
|
|
|
by KQ6XA on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In this case, even the VK and ZL stations will hear the BPL transmissions via ionospheric propagation.
Since it takes very little signal to propagate on HF, it is guaranteed that the noise will be heard in other parts of North and South America, Europe, Africa, Oceania, New Zealand and Australia.
I urge amateurs in all countries to reply to the FCC about this issue and point out the fact that HF propagation provides a path that is sometimes better than groundwave. Thus, BPL in USA will be infringing on other countries' spectrum.
Bonnie KQ6XA
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KI8JD on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Not very long ago, the ARRL petitioned for a 5 MHz band. After the comment period had ended, a US government entity stated that they were already using that spectrum, and, of course, that is why we ended up with 5 channels, instead of a band. Where is this government entity now? Doesn't our own government also use this vast amount of spectrum which will be affected by BPL? Just wondering.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N3HKN on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
IF all of the dire predictions are true the shortwave spectrum would be relegated to a mass of noise with exceptions filtered out for "essential' services - WWV etc.
It is beyond imagination that anyone would permit the shortwave spectrum to be rendered unuseable. Could the millions in bribes (sorry contributions) being given to crooked and immoral politicians actually cause this to occur?
If the FCC requires filters for specific frequencies will Hams be on that list?
Once you add up all of the protected frequencies the amount of bandwidth available is probably not sufficient to compete with cable or DSL. Thus long debates will occur and more money poors into the politicians pockets. Hmmm, maybe lengthy debates are a nice thing if you work in Washington !
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KA4KOE on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
You need to write you senators and reps. You need to contribute to the ARRL's defense fund. Plus, you need to watch the video on the league site. Its damn scary.
P
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by AA4PB on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is another of those cases where the managers (FCC and otherwise) don't have a clue about the technology. Even the head of NTIA (the equivalent of FCC for the Federal users) has come out in full support of BPL.
The Washington Post carried an article praising the BPL tests in Manassas, Virginia. I quite imagine that all of the info was provided to them by the power company. They state what a great thing it will be to just carry your laptop into a neighbors house, plug it in and have instant Internet. Of course they don't have a clue that there has to be a bypass placed around the power transformer at the neighbors house in order for it to work. The Post writer declares that Manassas families will be turned into "technology pioneers" by the end of the year, not having a clue that this ineffective technology has already been "pioneered" in numerous other countries and abandoned by some as unworkable.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K0BG on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Ask any Japanese amateur what he/she thinks about BPL.
Alan, KØBG
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W4MGY on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
The fututre of the shortwave listener (SWL) community is at stake with the prospects of BPL becoming a reality. Most of you might not know this, but several SWL groups have filed comments with the FCC on the BPL issue. On 30 June, 2003; the North American Shortwave Association (NASWA) submitted an 18 page filing in responce to the FCC's Notice of Inquiry 03-104 concerning BPL. If you have read the ARRL's article about BPL, you might have noticed that HomePlug system has claimed it will have 30 dB 'notches' built into it's system to prevent interference to amateurs. That's great for hams. Not so for the shortwave broadcast bands. Unlike hams, most SWLs generally use simple wire antennas for most of their listening persuits. Many SWLs have to use simple indoor antennas due to housing constraints, CC&R, and homeowner's Association rules. This includes whip antennas found on portable radios. Considering all of the limits imposed on having small antennas, and receiving BPL emissions full strength, BPL could easily destroy the SWL hobby as we have known and loved it fot over 70 years.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I need to put in another 2 cents worth as I feel this BPL is the most serious threat to the HF spectrum that has ever been conceived.
I am no expert of U.S constitutional law but do you not have a Bill of Rights? Say like the community has had amateur radio for more than 100 years, it is entrenched into the American way of life.
A means of freedom of expression and speech, this must be covered in the U.S constition.
The U.S has 700,000 amateurs, XXX amount of CB'ers, XXX amount of Shortwave Listeners, not to mention Schools and Universities carrying out HF Planetary studies of Jupiter around 24Mhz...
Get these groups together as one very powerful voice of the people will be heard, enough to shock the Politicians to drop this unethical adoption of BPL.
Explain how ADSL works fine over 2 pair telephone wires and causes no interference, the infrustructure is already in place and will cause no grief.
The ARRL needs to go into overdrive on this issue as well as every HF interest group world wide.
I suggest allowing the ARRL to take full charge of operations and coordinate with as many HF interest groups as possible with a full out attack on Politicians that are nieve enough to support BPL.
Are there any Amateurs in Manassas who are suffering HF interference? Start a class action..throw some weight around...Blame Bush..he will need every vote he can get at the next election.
Get the Universities involved, they can give a credible account of the damage that BPL can do..
Move fast, act now, I will be onto the WIA first thing Monday morning to push for International resources and pressure on the FCC.
This is it boys, its time for a showdown..
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by WS4V on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
After the unfortunate but inevitable power grid failure that plunged almost the entire NorthEast, Ohio and Michigan into darkness I seriously doubt BPL is going to be a major priority now for the power companies. Obviously the power lines and power systems themselves need to be seriously "modernized".
BPL, I believe, has just been wiped clean from any proposed future budget programs.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KC8WCW on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
K0BG: Alan, can you elaborate on the BPL situation in Japan? I thought your comment was interesting, however I'm admittedly less than informed about what they have to contend with. I would think that their experience would prove to be a better indication of possible issues, than the small target areas currently being tested in the US.
Thanks,
Robert KC8WCW
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KB1IUB on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
The Bill of Rights protects you from the
government in unreasonable demands. It
does not necessarily protect you from
other citizens depending on your framework
regarding constitutional interpretation.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KG6RHN on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Unfortunately I think just the opposite will occur power companys may see this as a chance to get not only modernize electric distribution but also to prepare the system for BPL at the same time.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N1RWC on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have a simple request. And it is simple.
Let's focus on the issue at hand, BPL.
LET'S NOT MAKE THIS ANOTHER ARRL BASHING ARTICLE.
I commend the Authors of the good articles, QRP Antennas, Operating Modes, How to, Etc.
The ARRL Articles are getting one thing...
BORING
If we put as much effort into bashing and referring to them vs. us and used that effort to do something productive in the hobby, maybe we wouldn't have to worry about BPL.
Kinda interesting, simple concept, use it proper and show it, or lose it.
By the way, if you participate in any Nets to assist the Northeast due to the Power Outage, let your government reps know. I let my local State Rep and Senators Offices know, and they wanted to know more. Wonder why? Maybe because they realize told to them in the right light, can be utilized for them as a reference at re-election time.
Little PR goes a long way if done right.
Just one Amateur's Opinion.
73 Matt N1RWC
PS, I should have an interesting article next week on operating Maritime Mobile for those who want something other than CW vs Non CW, ARRL vs NON ARRL, Bellyacher vs Pencil Neck Bellyacher.
73 and see ya on 6
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KB1IUB on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I was wondering the same thing.
However, If you are going to string
new wire wouldn't BPL just be a freebie?
Don't count it out yet.
BIll
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KD7EFQ on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
To the gentleman who commented about the bill of rights, We in America have one major stumbling block that needs to be overcome. It's called APATHY! Less than 50% of eligible voters turn out in our elections. The FCC site last time I looked only had 2945 comments on BPL. Thats really going to counter the millions who will be conned into having to have BPL as the latest, greatest technology. We need to get off our collective butts, and stand up and be heard. There should be 50,000 - 100,000 comments on the FCC website by now out of 600,000+ licensed hams! T
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W7WIK on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If BPL becomes a reality and makes it impossible to operate HF, I think I'd have to drop the hobby. VHF and above has never been my thing - except as a utility.
As a member of ARES, if HF were wiped out I don't think I'd be involved with ARES either. I think many have the same feeling.
If called for an emergency, there would me many that would have to say, "Sorry, I sold my equipment and don't do ham radio anymore".
Marco Wikstrom, W7WIK
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KI7G on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Check out this article from PC World, especially paragraph three. What utter crap!
BPL Coming Soon?
...But because new digital power line designs use a large frequency range, unlike most radio frequency devices, the FCC inquiry will look into whether BPL services could interfere with everything from garage door openers to police radios, said Joseph Cufari, vice president of business development for Current Technologies, based in Germantown, Maryland. Current Technologies is testing power line broadband in Maryland and Ohio, and other companies are conducting tests in several other states.
The current FCC rules, last revised in October 2001, don't provide for an accurate way to measure BPL emissions, Cufari said, because they weren't written with power line broadband in mind. "It was never thought of," he added.
The inquiry may not dig up any emission problems, said Ed Thomas, chief engineer in the FCC Office of Engineering and Technology, and he declined to guess who might raise objections about interference. "I don't want to prejudge that," he said to reporters after the commission meeting. "Our question is not to say there is interference, it's to find out if there is interference. If anybody has concerns, we want to give them the opportunity to voice those concerns."
A representative from the U.S. Internet Industry Association didn't return phone calls seeking comment on power line broadband..."
[Endquote]
The Reason he's saying that is because of what the FCC chairman said in another article. Check out THIS quote from Network World!:
"The focus is to ensure that regulatory issues don't sidetrack adoption. The FCC's notice of inquiry explores ways to update our rules to ensure that regulatory uncertainty does not in any way hinder the deployment of these new services," Powell said in a statement."
Full Article 1:http://www.pcworld.com/news/article/0,aid,110390,00.asp
Full Article 2: http://www.nwfusion.com/news/2003/0602carrspecialfocus.html?page=2
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KD5TUF on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Has anyone looked at the FCC band plan? BPL "may" be a thing to come, but the interference will HAVE to be at a minimum. Take a look at http://www.columbia.edu/~fuat/cuarc/fcc-bandplan.html and see the entire picture. Not only will our HF frequencies be lost, but what about SWL stations, our military frequencies? What about our VHF television stations? Are you to tell me that if the interference is bad enough, we will get free cable or satellite TV so we can watch our local stations? What about the Highway Maintenance frequencies? What about small town Police and Fire that can’t afford to get on the 800MHz system?
The point here is, its not just us, its everyone! I have no problem with everyone having internet access, but the technology needs to be put in place first to avoid any interference problems.
Just my $0.02 worth
Jon
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W9WHE on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
VK3KCG asks:
"I am no expert of U.S constitutional law but do you not have a Bill of Rights?"
Yes we do! Its a model for all the world.
However, U.S. hams operate under a "license" not a "deed of ownership". U.S. hams do not "own" the spectrum, but operate under the authority of and under terms set by the FCC. Thus, we have a "privelege" to operate...not a "right". Under U.S. constitutional law, a "right" is something given by the constitution which the governmet cannot take away. We have no "right" to a clear spectrum here in the U.S. There is nothing in the U.S. constitution giving hams a "right" to a clear spectrum.
How does it work in VK land?? Does your constitution mention a right to have a clear spectrum??
If the FCC exempts BPL from the customary ban on generating "harmful interference" (part 15), then U.S. hams will have to live with BPL until digital technology advances.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K1CJS on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"........Obviously the power lines and power systems themselves need to be seriously "modernized".
BPL, I believe, has just been wiped clean from any proposed future budget programs."
Don't bet on it! The national electrical distribution grid is going to have to be modernized according to Dubya. The local distribution systems that have stakes in the national grid system are going to have to foot the bill for the modernization--just as we all are through our electric bills.
BPL, even though it needs infrastructure to get going, will promise the electric companies increased revenue to fund the needed upgrades.
Consumers will balk at increases to their electric bills in this uncertain economic time, and guess what? Here comes BPL with the incentive of increased revenue. It looks to me as if BPL will be pushed even harder now.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K6TLA on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Amateur radio users aren't the only group who will be affected by BPL interference. Government and the military are heavy users of HF also, sometimes now a backup to satellite communications but the primary when satellites or ground stations become unusable. Can you imagine FEMA or SAC unable to communicate in an emergency because of broadband noise present locally throughout the country and internationally via the ionosphere? Common sense says that unless BPL emissions can be kept very close to power lines this just isn't going to fly. Of course the electrical grid wasn't designed for RF so the whole gamut of bad connection and radiation possibilities exists.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KK7QI on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hey all:
I admit I had been standing on the sidelines for BPL (although I did
contribute a decent amount of money to the ARRL Spectrum Defense
Fund), however, it wasn't until I saw the ARRL's Video depicting the
actual interference that BPL generates that really made my blood boil
and got me to file my comments to the FCC.
Here is a link to the shocking video (PLEASE WATCH IT):
http://216.167.96.120/BPL_Trial-web.mpg
Here is an EASY link to let you file your comments about BPL:
http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/ecfs/Upload/
Tick the top Docket: BPL 03-014
Then Click the Continue Button at the bottom of the page.
Then fill in the form with your comments and hit submit.
If BPL really goes through, I'll be putting almost all of my Ham
Equipment up for Sale -- although it'll probably be worthless except
for scrap metal and silicon.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K0CBA on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I was going to make a 'tongue in cheek' comment but the more I thought about it the less wise %#@'ed it sounds....With all the CC&R's, local "gub'mint" restrictions and subdivision Nazies forbidding antennas, especially for the HF spectrum, how many hams are going to be in a position to notice the noise floor increase? When it comes to killing or at least seriously wounding (HF) ham radio I am begining to believe antenna restrictions (hell, antenna elimination) is step one and BPL will be the knock out punch. It's a good plan though; it's hard to complain to any official department when if they ask "what problems are you having?" and Joe Ham has to answer, "well none because I can't have an antenna".
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N3NL on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Those who want to examine the future 200 meters and
down should examine the "DC to Daylight" articles in
the Microwavelengths column in QST magazine (ARRL).
These two articles in the July and September issues
of QST discuss the millimeter waves and ham radio.
This is where ham radio will go if the corporate
owners of America push us off the HF bands with BPL.
However, the millimeter waves sound interesting based
on their own merits too.
73, Nickolaus E. Leggett, N3NL
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W8OB on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
In yesterdays newspaper there was a large public notice from a future BPL carrier saying they are going to be providing this service to a very large part of the Michigan area. Its closer than you think.
This provider claimed to be associated with the Rural Power System. I think they are going to blow out the HF spectrum starting with the dude's out in the sticks first then slowly slither like the snakes they are into the city areas. I am in close contact with 3 utility companies here so far only the local one has said they have no intention of providing BPL in their service area. Again though none of the big wigs have seen the dollar signs yet.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KD5YOU on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
It seems like most of the effort is going into stopping (requesting) the FCC from allowing BPL to happen. In my opinion I think it would be easier to convince people I know to not do something than a distant government commission. Is it possible to create a national lack of interest in BPL so that it would not be feasible to implement this plan?
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KD7KKC on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
I have to pose a question, are there any Amateurs or SWLs that live in the already affected areas bringing the power companies to task against interference? With the increasing number of power companies being being dealt with for interference as of late, a landslide of complaints of interference from an unliscenced to a liscenced user should get attention. The good part is that it is not the neighbor that a complaint is issued against for interfering equipment but the utility.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To get the public on side maybe a National Scare Campaign telling people that whenever they walk down the street they will be getting a good dose of extra electro magnetic radiation, this could increase the risk of Cancer or make you sterile or make your hair fall out.
A quick action to TV stations (who may suffer 2nd and 3rd harmonic interference) should be used to educate the public on the down side of BPL...maybe when the ARRL mobile test were done they should of had a portable TV set in the car with lines going all over the screen.
What about AM radio stations?? Will they suffer interference via multiple frequency mixing products?
Get Clear Channel involved, as it is the U.S Governments propaganda machine then maybe it could be used to advantage.
I think it is time to pull some strings, get the media involved.
There must be some Hams who know Talk show host or contacts in the broadcast industry that can help.
The battle can be won by,
1 Complaining to the Politicians.
2 Complaining to the FCC
3 A public education campaign
4 Supporting the ARRL fighting fund
5 Recommending ADSL over telephone wire.
Are there big players in the U.S who do ADSL ?
Talk to them ,use there marketing power to educate the Public on the harm that BPL causes.
Align the corporate players that are in opposition to BPL.
This can be won but EVERYBODY needs to act NOW...
I would like to see test carried out to see if the AM broadcast and /or TV frequencies suffer interference.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by AB7JK on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Looks like mountaintop to mountaintop QRP operating may become fashionable.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W3DCG on August 15, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
But who'll you hear and visa versa thru the noise?
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by WM8R on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Cincinnati Gas and Electric is one of the test utilities currently running BPL. Through some research in the newspaper archives I was able to locate the street and addresses where they are running the tests. Late Friday night 8/15/03 a friend and I cruised around the area and found at least one of the signals near 3.012 MHz. This test is only being conducted in a small section of one street, as far as I know, and the signals were 20dB over S9 for several blocks, with sginal strength increasing near the "interface" boxes where the service is coupled to the secondary lines feeding the houses. If the utilities are allowed to install this nationwide we will lose major use of the HF frequencies. The signals will not be limited to only one frequencies and will probably have strong signals on harmonics as well. We plan to go back this weekend with measuring equipment to measure signal strengths and try to locate other frequencies in use.
PLEASE PLEASE PLEASE send your comments to the FCC before the August 20 deadline.
Mark WM8R
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have just emailed the ARRL BPL video link to around 160 international Shortwave broadcasting services, some of the Feeback I received especially from U.S based Religeous broadcasters was Quote " What is BPL and what can be done to stop it".
If my calculations are correct then 10,000 miles of power lines radiating accross the Shortwave spectrum is going to stuff it for everyone.
BPL will be heard in every other country just by the shear size of the power grid, Maybe if attention is brought to international Governments some Political pressure can be put on the FCC and Cohorts.
Email the ARRL BPL link to as many Politicians as you can find, send the link to the Top management of the Power Companies and see if they know the truth.
How about getting the Truckers that use CB to hold a National strike over the issue, (it will affect them as well) these guys use CB as way of providing safety information to each other and have most likely saved the lives of many people by quickly passing on information.
There are hundreds of radio related Webpages around the World, do like I do email the ARRL BPL Video link so that they can be as shocked as I am.
http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/08/08/2/?nc=1
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by SM0AOM on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
As several posters point out, there is a definite risk that ionospheric propagation can spread aggregate PLT/BPL interference signals over national borders.
Most large scale HF users are very well aware of this,
the quote below comes from a presentation made by NATO
frequency management officials at the HF01 conference (Fårö Sweden August 2001):
"These systems may be considered to be the 'ultimate jammers', since they can acheive what no single enemy Nation could ever aspire to - globally widespread, wide frequency spectrum, all-pervasive production of high levels of background noise"
The same concerns have been voiced from the air traffic control and aviation safety community in Europe:
http://www.eurocontrol.int/sma/SPG%20Positions20documents/EurocontrolPLTBrief.pdf
Finally, as over the horizon propagation of PLT/BPL spectrum pollution can be expected, this clearly is an international matter. The ITU Radio Regulations have specific wording to this effect:
"Section II. Interference from Electrical Apparatus
and Installations of any Kind Except Equipment Used
for Industrial, Scientific and Medical Applications
§ 9. Administrations shall take all practicable and necessary steps to ensure that the operation of electrical apparatus or installations of
any kind, including power and telecommunication distribution networks, but excluding equipment used for industrial, scientific and
medical applications, does not cause harmful interference to a radiocommunication service and, in particular, to a radionavigation or any
other safety service operating in accordance with the provisions of these Regulations *.
*In this matter, administrations should be guided by the latest relevant CCIR Recommendations"
Remember that in ITU-speak 'shall' means 'without exception'.
73/
Karl-Arne
SM0AOM
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by WB9UDJ on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
And the power companies can not keep their system that they are in business to provide working in parts of the country. How do they expect to do this BPL thing and keep it anynear close to working right?
It is time to stand up and be counted against this intrusion.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K3NG on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
"And the power companies can not keep their system that they are in business to provide working in parts of the country. How do they expect to do this BPL thing and keep it anynear close to working right? "
Watch out. BPL proponents may use the blackout to push their agenda. They'll argue the grid is "antiquated", so we need to "upgrade" from the low frequency control and monitoring type PLC to broadband BPL. And don't be surprised if some utilities try to divert some blackout related funding to BPL.
Power grid security and reliability has become as hot as "homeland security" now. Every politician is
instantly an electrical engineer.
73
Goody
K3NG
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KE6SCR on August 16, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Interestingly enough, BPL may cause another problem.
When I had cable television installed in my apartment, I wanted is run in every room. They told me that they couldn't do that, since the leaking signal could cause problems with aircraft in flight. Hmmm... Cable is around the 50Mhz band, right... Imagine the airliner crashes from leaky, noisy BPL systems....
Kel
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by WX3K on August 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
KK7QI said....
"If BPL really goes through, I'll be putting almost all of my Ham
Equipment up for Sale -- although it'll probably be worthless except
for scrap metal and silicon."
WX3K replies.....Where is your spirit ? Giving up on Ham radio ? Its time to pull out your pen and write your reps and senators. Amateur Radio is a great resource of technically capable folks who can pull together during times of adversity and communicate. Dont let the bastards wear you down ! Fight the electric utilities, fight the FCC and their greed.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W2RS on August 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi again,
SM0MOM, VK3KCG and others mention the interference which BPL in the United States is likely to cause to radio operations outside the country, through ionospheric propagation.
Right on! Ed Hare, W1RFI, analyzed this case in a paper you can find on ARRL's Web site, and reached a similar conclusion.
Those of you outside the U.S.: Don't just tell us on e-ham.net, tell FCC also! Simple instructions for filing Reply Comments electronically are also on www.arrl.org. Even better, see if you can get your national radio societies to join in.
Reply Comments are due this Wednesday, 20 August.
73,
Ray, W2RS
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I have been in contact with the ITU, the Secretary General may take action if they get enough complaints about the posibility of ionospheric propagation of BPL.
Send mail to,
sgo@itu.int
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by K0RGR on August 17, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I don't want to get too political, but we should not overlook some possible avenues for attacking this beast.
Our current president depends on rock-solid support from various conservative groups, and contributions from various corporate interests. Historically, the president has enjoyed strong financial support from the energy industry - Enron's Ken Lay was his chief fund raiser. Did you notice that Mr. Bush's first comments after the blackout were a call for Congress to pass his energy bill that would spend $billions to fund rebuilding the power grids?
However, he has come under fire from even some of his most conservative supporters for things that are viewed as eclipsing various American freedoms. How will they react when they discover that the only American communications medium that is NOT subject to immediate govenmental censorship and control is about to be wiped out? Frankly, this administration has made me paranoid - I hope this isn't actually the plan!
How might the Democrats react if they find out that this pro-corporate president is about to pour the electronic equivalent of hot nuclear waste all over the free, public airwaves? Could they use this as an issue to save face on the National Energy Bill debacle they're fighting.
If the public remains unaware of this, or is subject only to the pro-BPL propaganda from the power companies and the government, I think we are in big trouble.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N3NL on August 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Since the FCC is pushing strongly for BPL, perhaps
we should ask the question: Does President Bush
want to shut down ham radio?
Maybe it would be a good idea to write to the White
House about the BPL issue.
73, Nickolaus E. Leggett, N3NL
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W9WHE on August 19, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
On poster writes:
"And the power companies can not keep their system that they are in business to provide working in parts of the country. How do they expect to do this BPL thing and keep it anynear close to working right?"
One multi-state black-out every 27 years is NOT such a bad record. While it could be better, its certainly not "3rd world".
The black-out is being hyped and exploited by liberals that seek to blame Bush. Keep your perspective!
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by VK3KCG on August 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To write to Mr Bush and tell him all about BPL and the damage that will happen to Amateur radio go to the web address below and get in his ear..
https://sawho14.eop.gov/PERSdata/intro.htm
Also for back up contact,
President George W. Bush: president@whitehouse.gov
Vice President Richard Cheney: vice.president@whitehouse.gov
The buck stops with Bush.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W2RS on August 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Hi,
To clarify for our overseas friends the way the U.S. government is organized, the FCC is an independent agency, responsible to Congress and not to the Executive Branch. Commissioners are nominated by the President and confirmed by the Senate. Once confirmed, they serve for five-year terms and not at the pleasure of the President.
In contrast, NTIA, which is responsible for managing the Federal Government's use of the spectrum, is a unit of the Department of Commerce, and as such is a part of the Executive Branch, responsible to President Bush through the Secretary of Commerce.
So, if you write to President Bush about BPL, your comments should address the role of NTIA (which has called for additional testing before any decisions are reached).
A reminder: Reply Comments to FCC in the BPL matter are due at midnight tonight ET, or 0400 UTC on 21 August.
73,
Ray, W2RS
From www.fcc.gov:
The Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is an independent United States government agency, directly responsible to Congress. The FCC was established by the Communications Act of 1934 and is charged with regulating interstate and international communications by radio, television, wire, satellite and cable. The FCC's jurisdiction covers the 50 states, the District of Columbia, and U.S. possessions.
The FCC is directed by five Commissioners appointed by the President and confirmed by the Senate for 5-year terms, except when filling an unexpired term. The President designates one of the Commissioners to serve as Chairperson. Only three Commissioners may be members of the same political party. None of them can have a financial interest in any Commission-related business.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by KC0KEK on August 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
At least in North America, I doubt that BPL will get very far because most utilities can't make a strong business case for it.
First, the electrical system in Europe offers far better support for BPL, while the U.S. system would require some expensive changes to support a mass-market BPL service.
Second, even if all North American utilities could roll out BPL tomorrow, they'd be going up against established players such as cable and DSL. Can BPL match their pricing? Doubtful, especially if the electric infrastructure has to go through an expensive overhaul. And getting into a price war with cable and DSL just pushes BPL's break-even point even farther down the road.
I don't see BPL becoming a mainstream service in the North American market. Yes, the ARRL should keep an eye on it, but it's not enough of a threat the league should divert its resources from other, greater threats.
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by WA9JBM on August 20, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
W9whe,
U luv AR or dollars? U got money or other in BPL?
pse xplain, tnx, john
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N2NZJ on August 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If BPL DOCKET#03-104 Makes we all know there will be an RF night mare for all services using 2-80mhz it would cause us to move to 23cm and up. we would spend years to trying to recind BPL and as you all know that might be a futile effort until a newer and cleaner broadband system replaces it. and that may take YEARS NOT MONTHS. so I hope DOCKET #03- 104 is DEFEATED BY ALL parties concerned. best 73's to all.
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W1RFI on August 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
<Right on! Ed Hare, W1RFI, analyzed this case in a paper you can find on ARRL's Web site, and reached a similar conclusion.>
That paper was intended to raise the question of ionospheric propagation, not necessarily to answer it. You may have noted that it was not among those that the League filed with the FCC.
A more conservative analysis, based on 10,000 emitters at the Part 15 level, predicts that those signals might be just about equal to typical amateur noise-floor levels propagated to nearby cities. Whether there would be 10,000 simulutaneous emitters in a particular metropolitan area depends on how the system may be configured. In some cases, the BPL signal is shared on the overhead line, so one or twenty signals are all at the same level. It truly would matter how many such shared lines there are in operation in a given area.
Amateurs should be careful not to raise concerns in the NOI based on speculation. It is good to ask the questions, but until the answers can be determined and brought to the plate, the waters should not be muddied.
The next round is to analyze the reply comments and come back to the FCC with sound science to counter them. There is some stuff that looks good at first glance, but I am already seeing the holes. :-)
73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by AB5XZ on August 21, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
To see how bad BPL can get, go to www.fcc.gov, and to e-filing, and search for filed comments on 03-104, with the name "aeronautical".
This will get you the filed comments of ARINC, Aeronautical Radio Inc., which is a provider of lots of aviation communications services worldwide, along with avionics system design and engineering.
ARINC tells the horror story of losing an aero monitoring frequency (3103 KHz, I think) to one of the plug-in devices that lets you add a phone extension without running twisted pair wire. They started hearing lots of noise on the monitoring frequency, and they couldn't hear the aircraft out in the Pacific from the Half Moon Bay, CA station. They complained to the FCC, and ARINC/FCC investigators couldn't locate the offending device (probably because there were lots of them). ARINC bought the same device and showed that they could hear HF noise from it, at the level seen in Half Moon Bay, from a distance of 5 miles. Since they were unable to locate the source precisely, they had to ABANDON the monitoring frequency.
I suspect that we will see similar things happening with these broadband power line devices (including HomePlug), and it will be impossible to get rid of them. This may happen regardless of the outcome of Docket 03-104.
73
|
| |
|
200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by W4LOS on August 22, 2003
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
First of all I can't belive there is ONLY "1" PAGE of reply comments to this issue!!! This is a VERY SERIOUS matter to all Amateur radio operators and even Professional SW Broadcasters alike. As one of the replies has mentioned, there are MANY other technical ways that the so called? "Great Information Super-Hiway" could send Data instead of BPL!
The Companies that are trying to create this SYS.? have used some very shewed RF enginneers that are being WELL/OVERLY paid to find the cheapest way possible to send Internet Data by the existing Power line infrastructure when they have the $$$$ to do it otherwise!! So, Why do it this way?? One word only gentlemen "GREED,GREED,GREED"
The less people know and understand what this will do to all the communication sys.in the HF bands the better!
Does the US govt. agency called the "FCC" need its pockets linned for allowing this type of transmission sys.?!?!? You it bet it does!! Why??? One word again gentlemen "GREED" at the expence of all others! No matter what the cost!
Wake up Gentlemen, Time to smell the coffee!!
73 for a Ham Future
|
| |
|
RE: 200 Meters and Down -- 2003 Edition
|
|
|
by N8YV on January 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
[Quote AA4PB]:
"This is another of those cases where the managers (FCC and otherwise) don't have a clue about the technology".
------------------------------------------
We can largely thank the Clinton administration for this situation. The FCC "used" to be staffed with engineers, specialists and technicians. After 1990, the make-up of the Commission changed dramatically.
Professionally-degreed politicians and cronie lawyers, should never have been allowed to assume the helm at the FCC.
N8YV
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
Spread Spectrum Inventor, Actress Hedy Lamarr Dies
NTIA Spectrum Management Inquiry Poses No Danger to Ham Radio:
After The Dust Settles What's Left?
NTIA Report Lays Groundwork for Responsible Deployment Of BPL:
FCC Forms Wireless Broadband Access Task Force, Seeks Public Comment:
Other Regulatory Articles
Bandwidth versus Keying Speed
Fact or Fallacy?
HFA Spotlights ARRL Board Meeting
Kiss 33cm (900 MHz) Goodbye?
Group Lists 'Antenna Allies' In Congress
|
