More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
LLoyd Phillips (KC4VFP)
on
April 27, 2004
View comments about this article!
"Using a single-cell site, Vyyo’s 700 MHz system can provide high-speed broadband data and voice services to thousands of subscribers within a 25-mile radius, according to an announcement issued by the company." (tests under way in N.D.)
http://www.shorecliffcommunications.com/magazine/news.asp?news=3282
The FCC is now contemplating more high-speed broadband spectrum at 700 MHz.
-and-
This is IN ADDITION to the FCC opening 3.65-3.70 GHz for Rural Broadband
http://www.shorecliffcommunications.com/magazine/news.asp?news=3259
This article has expired. No more comments may be added.
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by L1D on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
First, BPL != Broadband. Sounds to me like anyone investing in BPL today is getting fools gold. Therefore, BPL = Fools Gold! Not very good logic, but sound advice.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by N0HR on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Uhhh - neither of these articles are talking about BPL (Broadband Over Power Line).
BPL is quite a different beast (threat) than these proposed *wireless* systems. See: http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/ for a primer.
Frankly, I've not heard much in the way of complaints against either the wireless internet providers or the WI-FI crowd in terms of generating QRM on the ham bands.
Pat,
NØHR
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by NE1Z on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Now we are seeing BPL under every rock?
Reading will set you free of this paranoia!
Bill
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by AC0X on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
NE1Z...
If you actually read the poster's comments, he was calling BPL "fools gold" because of the increasing ways of delivering broadband via wireless, avoiding the problems of noisy power lines.
What exactly is your agenda? We'd like to know. First you say BPL is not a problem. Then you tell us we shouldn't complain when we see that it is.
|
| |
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by W4MGY on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
If the FCC is in need of more frequency space to provide every computer user broadband access; we ought to make a deal with them. Put an end to this stinkin BPL business that threaten to destroy the HF and lower VHF frequencies, and we will give up the amateur bands 3.3 GHz and above. This is not a tongue in cheek statement, I am serious. Let's be a pragmatic here. Over 99% of all ham radio activity exists on the HF and VHF/UHF bands. Throw in 1.2 and 2.4 GHz for satellite operation; thats all the spectrum we really need. In this day and time of ever increasing need for more frequency spectra; in all honesty, it is difficult see how the amateur community can expect to hold on to the microwave frequencies at 3.3 GHz and above. Yes, there is big money involved. But to retain the use of RF spectrum that is well suited for future wireless broadband internet use for a very tiny group of amateurs is rather selfish indeed. Granted, a few dish jockeys will get out of shape if this will ever come to be. It would be better to give up little used spectrum space if there was a chance that precious HF spectrum could be preserved.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by KT0DD on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Apparently NE1Z is a major stockholder in BPL, or he has some other "Special Interest" ties to this. I can't help but think we are seeing W9WHE's rhetoric being parroted here. BPL is rapidly becoming obsolete, if it's not already. 802.11, I-burst (Australia) satellite, and cell phone internet are rapidly evolving with much greater speeds. BPL isn't wireless, as you still need to plug in to the wall socket for it. "Completely wireless" is the new wave of internet access. 73.
|
| |
|
FCC: Conflict of Interest?
|
|
|
by KC4VFP on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
There are other, more efficient ways of delivering BROADBAND, without the inherent limitations and bit-error-rate encountered in power grid BPL. The inductive kick from one multi-ton AC unit kicking off blankets the spectrum.
For instance, BPL in Florida would be a joke, because of lightning and the poorly maintined grid:
http://www.TVtower.com/fpl.html
Remember: Microwaves were first generated by using a 50 Kc alternator.
It is inconsistant, and appears to be a conflict of interest, for the U.S. Government to "raffle" off specific frequencies in the newly created 700 MHz Band for a specific purpose, with the expectation that the "winner" would have rights to provide a specific service, based on his investment, and then have the Government (FCC) undermine this investment by "granting" (without EQUAL payment) the right for a utility company or private investor to provide the same or similar service.
The Federal Government passed the "Budget Reduction Act" in the early '90's. This is how the "PCS" cell-phone band at 1.9 Ghz came into being - it was simply actioned off to the highest bidder, to be used for a specific purpose.
In a manner similar to NEXTEL, who tried to acquire these frequencies FREE, telling the FCC that they neede more spectrum, and then pulling a sneaky trick by having a petition drive on the television program "AMERICA'S MOST WANTED," claiming that they interfered with police communications and it would be in the public interest for the FCC to GIVE them free spectrum, BPL is attempting to take a FREE RIDE on the coat-tailes of digital technology.
They are not only asking to tread FREE where others have had to pay, they are actually doing a dis-service to their potential customers by starting out with a system that, by its nature, guarantees a high bit error rate, and subject to interuption (RFinterference, and grid and appliance-genertaed drop-outs).
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by KC0LTV on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I had a Monet Broadband 1xEVDO wireless connection (about 1.9 GHz PCS band?) between December 2002 and March 2004 (they went bankrupt). I think that wireless is the way to go for broadband. There's little interference to ham services, existing cell towers could be adapted to 1xEVDO or a similar wireless access technology, and connections could be made in a mobile environment. Perhaps community wireless internet cooperatives, designed with the help of hams are the way to go.
As for frequencies, the PCS band may be right. Perhaps it could be expanded. Another possibilty is what I think is called ITFS, like a 2.6~ GHz instructional TV service. I don't think we need to give up ALL of our spectrum above 3 GHz.
The only real interference problem comes from microwave ovens around 2.5 GHz. My Monet connection never had trouble here.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by KC0LTV on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Two other wireless possbilities:
-Internet Services through DTV Channels?
-The 700 MHz service above - sounds GREAT
|
| |
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by N3NL on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I would not want to throw away the amateur radio
microwave allocations. There is a lot of interesting
work that you can do up there. Indeed, Paul Rinaldo
at the ARRL is working on ham radio allocations
above 1 THz. (See April 2004 QST page 98)
Once we can over-ride those wretched
restrictive covenants my mini-dish goes up for
microwave and higher communications.
73, Nickolaus E. Leggett, N3NL
Also, remember that most of the microwave allocations
are already shared with other services so there is
nothing to be gained by throwing them away.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by NE1Z on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
How does enhancing daily life of millions more than 700,000 suddenly turn into "throwing it away"???
What can be done is use some of our bands to expand existing allocations, creating a national bandplan.
Bill
|
| |
|
RE: FCC: Conflict of Interest?
|
|
|
by AG4RQ on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Posted by KC4VFP on April 27, 2004:
"For instance, BPL in Florida would be a joke, because of lightning and the poorly maintined grid:
http://www.TVtower.com/fpl.html"
Greetings, Lloyd from your neighbor to the south in Pembroke Pines. South Florida is the "Lightning Capital" of the world. If that isn't bad enough, Flickering Power and Light can't even provide reliable electrical service. Momentary power outages (for seconds) are numerous. Power outages ranging from 15 minutes to 2 hours are not uncommon during the summer months. Although I didn't get a direct hit from Hurricane Andrew, my power was off for 11 1/2 hours after that storm hit. The lights dim quite often, mostly during the summer. Yet, if you read FPL's comment to the BPL NOI, they are quite eager to implement BPL.
BPL is an obsolete technology that if implemented, will go the way of the 8-Track and the Beta video cassette. Wi-Fi is the future of broadband. If we get BPL, it won't be around for long. It is the Great White Elephant of the 21st Century. My primary worry is that after BPL falls on its face, FPL will seek to recoup their losses by jacking up our electric rates. Smile. Our wallets are about to become lighter. :-(
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by G3SEA on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
I believe W4MGY's crystal ball is accurate :)
This path has been increasingly inevitable in light of commercial demands.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by KF7CG on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Bill,
I love your hyperbole! Millions? That would require a lot of people to switch out their current broadband connections. By the way this is a broadband connection, but I am a software engineer and push a lot of crap down the wire.
If it weren't for work and waiting for the incessant advertising and gee whiz to load I wouldn't be.
One problem with the entire internet from content provider to home connection is that it is being used in ways that it was not intended. The net began and still is in much of its infrastructure a low volume high reliability design. One thing that causes problems is long periods of high usage.
Too much in the way of streaming video, audio, and incessant can you beat this graphics on web sites will eventually cause backbone problems. With high speed connections I can easily observe the site and backbone loading delays.
Broadband, especially BPL, isn't a stand alone solution. I have seen times where a 56k dialup was plenty fast enough to handle what was coming down the backbone.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by NE1Z on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Oh, the radio resume. I don't care that you think broadband is a waste, it is coming somehow! Need vs Want!
Hyperbole? Let's do numbers, since you like to portray any realistic view as an attempt to somehow twist reality.
We have less than 40% of homes, 60% of work with 56K+ connection & ~63 million users currently in the US. Lots of headroom for market growth.
There are 680,000 hams, ~half inactive.
Any questions?
I stand by my statement that millions of lives could benefit from ANY B-B, 3G or 4G. Those devices needs bandwidth, an infinite resource...
Bill
|
| |
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by L1D on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
If any of you own stock in a Electric Utility make sure to attend the share holder meeting and make your opinion know about BPL. If you can get your message out to other share holders about the BPL folly to other share holders we will effectively increase the forces against BPL. This technique has been effective against the infant formula industry and the tobacco industry. If you don't own a share, buy some and use that to get your message out.
Maybe someone more knowledgeable than me can write an article that takes into consideration how BPL intends to make a profit given the inferior technology it is based on.
We need something like groklaw.net to defeat BPL.
|
| |
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by N0FP on April 27, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Go to the ARRL website and read the front page news about Bush's comments on BPL. Get those QSL cards flowing into the white house mail box!
|
| |
|
More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by VA6SZ on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
|
Here in rural Alberta, there is already wireless internet service at 900MHz, 1.2GHz, and 5.7GHz. I've given up my plans for a 1.2GHz eme and weak signal set-up. And here, 900MHz is almost useless because of the wide spread qrm from "wide" signals (and the lack of enforcement). And now comes 5.7GHz. AND, all of these services are non-licensed so-called low erp services. Yet they seem to have the effect of chasing the licenced users off the bands. Go figure, what's worse? BPL or this aggressive intrusion and lack of enforcement of interference? I guess the all-mighty buck will rule the day. de Andy VA6SZ/VA6TTT.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by JN3XCV on April 28, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
This is not BPL it IEEE802.16a in the QPSK/16QAM physical layer option witha channel bandwidth to not exceed 6MHz.
Vyyo is using the standard based technology in licensed bands, hardly causing interference to any hams.
|
| |
|
Reed Hundt, ex-FCC PRO-700 MHz?
|
|
|
by NE1Z on April 29, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Reed Hundt, former commission chairman, told members of the Senate Committee on Commerce, Science and Transportation that the commission could vastly facilitate implementation and acceptance of high-speed wireless broadband by simply writing a letter to the FCC asking that the agency re-examine the digital television signal threshold figures that enables television stations to hang onto spectrum in the UHF spectrum for analog broadcast. He also said Congress should ask the FCC to look at secondary use of broadcast spectrum in areas where it is underused and to issue an order asking that unlicensed devices be allowed to operate in television broadcast spectrum at locations and times when the spectrum isn't being used. The commission currently has an inquiry into secondary use in 700 MHz.
Hundt, now on the boards of several high tech companies, including Wi-Fi equipment provider Pronto Networks, said those moves would free more desirable spectrum for immediate use of wireless companies looking to provide ultra-high-speed broadband services -- operating at up to 10 Mbps -- not traditional "3G" applications. Hundt backs technology and techniques such as Orthagonal Frequency Division Modulation, beam forming for antenna reception and IP as wireless services that could "deliver the bits" in such spectrum.
The former FCC chairman contends that the mandated 85 percent threshold of digital signal penetration that allows broadcasters to keep analog UHF spectrum has been crossed, if only the FCC would correctly count the numbers it already has accumulated. Regulations say broadcasters can hold onto the analog spectrum until 85 percent of the country has access to a digital signal. Hundt said that goal has been largely accomplished and the relatively small number of citizens who don't have the ability to access the signal and can't afford a digital device could easily be subsidized in the purchase of "set-top boxes."
Freeing up that spectrum in the 700 - 800 MHz band would provide cheap widely available means to deliver high-speed wireless services, said Hundt, in much the same way it did for broadcasters when it was granted to them decades ago.
Hundt said if the coveted broadcast spectrum could be freed up, and the FCC enforced its rules, wireless broadband could go a long way in bringing the United States in line with other countries with superior broadband penetration.
|
| |
|
RE: More Broadband (BPL) Spectrum at 700 MHz?
|
|
|
by K0RPT on April 30, 2004
|
Mail this to a friend!
|
Are you talking about the already excisting Datacasting services on some of the PBS systems nation wide? If so, with the video standards in place, you are limited to about 19 Mbit of data speed. Clearly not enough to facilitate broadband for the multitude.
Ed NETV
|
| |
|
Email Subscription
You are not subscribed to discussions on this article.
Subscribe!
My Subscriptions
Subscriptions Help
Related News & Articles
What is FCC Docket 03-104 Asking?
Invite Your Congressman or Congresswoman to Field Day!
Response to NY Times BPL Article
New Restrictions on BPL in Australia:
'Twas The Night Before BPL Ruling
Other News Articles
Cuba Facilitates Equipment to Amateur Radio Operators:
ARNewsline # 1684 -- Nov. 20 2009:
Propagation Forecast Bulletin #47 de K7RA:
Technology Enthusiast Boosts Skills with Amateur Radio:
Solar Radio Flux: Slow Upward Trend Since Summer:
|
