N3OGH
Bear patrol must be working like a charm
Premium
join:2003-11-11
Philly burbs
 ·Verizon FIOS
 ·Verizon Online DSL
| Great broadband hope?
Sounds like the great broadband hype to me.
Good luck to them getting it to work without interfering with exisiting services. I doubt this will happen, as the power grid in my area (Philly) has so many bad connections on it, I can map them with the interference heard on my AM radio as I travel down the road listening to the local sports talk station. |
|
fire100_old
Premium
join:2002-08-09
Michigan
clubs:
| I thought this was cool though.
quote:
A BPL extractor in Cedar Rapids The system uses 2.4 GHz WiFi to make the Internet connection between the pole and customers' homes. The extractor's antenna is glistening in the sunlight.
At least the residents don't have to worry about dealing with electricity should something go wrong with the service.
--
My Weather Page |
|
sabersaw
Premium
join:2001-08-21
Dayton, OH
| no kidding
lets see, the worlds largest antennas are causing interference. well, they are only talking about Ham ops now, when aircraft HF, Maritime HF, SWLs, government/utility people have interference issues.. maybe someone will learn that they are running in circles trying to deploy this technology without trashing atleast half a dozen legit services. |
|
BigCreek
God Is Good.
Premium
join:2002-06-25
Heber Springs, AR
| I'm always amazed ...
... that everyone seems so anxious to see this technology die. Are there problems with it? Apparently so. But we need this technology to compete with DSL/cable and to serve the dead areas.
So would everyone mind not doing the happy dance. There's not much to celebrate here.
Let's hope they can re-group and find solutions.
I, for one, want this to work.
--
Bragging: DirecWay SRS DW4000 BE Satmex5 117 1250 MHz, v4.2.1, Via EPIA Mini-ITX 533 MHz 512MB, Win2k Server SP4, WinRoute Pro, Red Hat Linux, Mozilla browser, OpenOffice.org; terrific wife & kids, live on a farm by Big Creek. |
|
techjoe
Premium
join:2004-02-20
Schererville, IN | Amen. |
|
sabersaw
Premium
join:2001-08-21
Dayton, OH
| reply to BigCreek
said by BigCreek  :
... that everyone seems so anxious to see this technology die. Are there problems with it? Apparently so. But we need this technology to compete with DSL/cable and to serve the dead areas.
Let's hope they can re-group and find solutions.
well in the meantime, anyone who interferes with a licensed radio station should be fined.
This entire concept is flawed.. its just amazing to me how much effort they are willing to put into this before they cut and run.
be mad at the telcos and cable companies for not having the infrastructure they should. after you have paid to build them up. |
|
edhalen
orange whip?
Premium
join:2002-05-16
Yorkville, IL
clubs: | seems like it might be worth a try....
Who knows? Nothing ventured nothing gained. 
--
Peace |
|
n2jtx
join:2001-01-13
Glen Head, NY
 ·Optimum Online
| reply to BigCreek
Re: I'm always amazed ...
said by BigCreek :
... that everyone seems so anxious to see this technology die. Are there problems with it? Apparently so. But we need this technology to compete with DSL/cable and to serve the dead areas.
So would everyone mind not doing the happy dance. There's not much to celebrate here.
Let's hope they can re-group and find solutions.
I, for one, want this to work.
No, we do not need this technology. Short of the BPL providers notching out all of the frequencies between 2MHz and 80MHz to mitigate interference, which would effectively stop it from working, or going around and placing shielding on all of the transmission lines, it is doomed to cause interference, period. What the FCC needs to come to terms with is the question about whether or not providing Internet service via this technology outweighs the destruction of the radio spectrum. They apparently seem to agree that it is but still need to sweep these nasty little "hiccups" with the technology under the rug. If there was no other way to provide broadband Internet, I would definitely say there is a problem and it might outweigh the benefits to having a clean HF spectrum. However, there is cable and DSL (and fiber if you are lucky), though the companies are not deploying it to many areas because there is no money to be made with regards to the investment they have to make in the equipment and infrastructure.
However, there appears to be another alternative besides BPL, DSL and Cable. If you take a look at »802.16 Ratified , there is an article on the new 802.16 wireless standard. It may be some time away but the Wimax idea looks perfect for rural areas without the HF mess caused by BPL. Stick up a large antenna and beam broadband to the entire community. Of course this will probably not be good in the truly rural areas where neighbors are several miles apart but then there is no way any broadband technology is going to be deployed in those areas anytime soon. In terms of investment, the only infrastructure will be the installation of the transmitting tower, the transceiver and the Internet equipment connected to the transceiver. End user installation will probably be no more difficult than installing satellite TV. |
|
ElJay
join:2004-03-17
·Great Works Internet
| reply to BigCreek
said by BigCreek :
But we need this technology to compete with DSL/cable and to serve the dead areas.
The whole thing sounded like a bad idea to me, from the interference to the 802.11b wireless link into the house. I just don't see how it's a great idea to have broadband with the side effect of random garbage being broadcast into the skies. |
|
gurugordon
join:2004-03-24
Sunbury, PA
| reply to BigCreek
said by BigCreek :
... that everyone seems so anxious to see this technology die. Are there problems with it? Apparently so. But we need this technology to compete with DSL/cable and to serve the dead areas.
Have you not been reading this board recently? Just why to you believe that BPL has any answer to the problems of the "dead" (meaning rural) areas.
BPL operators are faced with exactly the same problems as any other broadband provider - they have to justify their costs against potential income. They too have to install costly infrastructure to enable their service. In rural areas there is no possible ROI. So, why do we need it?
BPL is only viable in built-up areas, where there already is existing broadband availability. So, why do we need it?
BPL speeds can't match those of cable, never mind fiber. So, why do we need it?
BPL interferes with all other users of the HF spectrum, including emergency first responders and aeronautical safety, and prevents the reception of shortwave broadcasts, thus denying to the American people the chance to gain a perspective of world events independent of the sanitized version put out by the US media. So, why do we need it?
BPL has failed most every place else it has been deployed. So, why do we need it?
This is not tomorrow's technology - it is yesterday's failed technology. It should be placed in the trash can of history where it most firmly belongs. And yes, I am dancing at the prospect of its imminent demise.
Check out »www.gobpl.com for the facts about BPL. |
|
AaronGibson2
join:2004-02-02 | failure
I hope it fails so we can move on from attempting to use hacks over existing infrastructure in favor of networks specifically designed for data transmission. |
|
David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
·Be There
| BPL is the worst choice for rural areas
The totally bogus claim that BPL is suitable choice for rural deployment is one of the many lies along with “no interference” propagated by the BPL morons. The BPL strategy is to get the FCC to ignore the high levels of interference / spectrum pollution as the FCC wants to get broadband to communities that don’t have it
In reality, if the BPL companies succeed, they will abandon the rural areas and immediately focus on the wealthy suburban markets that are profitable and already have cable and DSL.
Check the numbers - DSL can work out to about ~ 16,000 feet from the central office. BPL can only go 2,000 feet from the BPL equivalent of a DSLAM, then it needs an expensive repeater installed by an linesman trained to work with 11,000 volt cables. So for a 16,000 foot run 8 BPL repeaters are needed.
At the customer’s pole transformer a bridge needs to be installed to couple the signals from the 11,000 volt line to your 110 volt line, if this bridge fails, say from a lightning strike you will have 11,000 volts on all of your outlets – ouch!
However the math is worked, there is no way the power companies can implement this vast array of expensive equipment in rural areas with any hope of meeting the projected pricing.
The existing DSL broadband technology is proven and could be provided to almost everyone who has a phone, the barriers are political (and FCC failure) not technical. The solution to universal broadband lies in ensuring the phone companies serve all of their customers equally. BPL is a broken legacy technology that is a pure distraction to the objective of universal broadband. |
|
David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
·Be There
| Aircraft radios - serious interference from BPL
BPL does not just interfere with the Amateur Radio Service it also interferes with aircraft communications and is a safely threat.
Read the details here;
»gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retr···16183088
The comments were filed by Boeing – the folks who build a lot of planes (747, 777, 737 etc.)
The fact that the FCC has totally ignored these comments (and about 6,000 others) and continues to “cheerlead” this failed gross polluting technology raises serious questions of negligence by the FCC commissioners. |
|
David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA | reply to edhalen
Tried and failed - worldwide
BPL (AKA PLC, PLT, DPL) has failed worldwide - Singapore, Holland, Germany, UK, Finland . . . .
In almost 10 years not a single successful deployment anywhere. |
|
David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA | reply to N3OGH
The great broadband hype
The power utilities need to focus on;
1) Maintaining and sorting out the interference from their existing equipment.
2) Keeping the lights on. |
|
SquareSlinky
Premium
join:2004-05-25
Tampa, FL | reply to David95037
Re: Tried and failed - worldwide
Has there been any technical advances in 10 years?
Succeed or fail, it is worth a try.
(and it isn't my money, so why not) |
|
Transmaster
Don't Blame Me I Voted For Bill and Opus
join:2001-06-20
Cheyenne, WY
·Qwest.net
| What I don't understand
All of this money and time going into BPL when this cash could be spent running fiber on the lines. The power companies are sitting on extensive rights of way and they
can string fiber all over everywhere. They would have everything they want grid control, remote meter reading,
and a nice broadband system all in one. With all of the lay off's from the Telcos the energy companies could hire all of the trained fiber optic installation and maintenance people they need.
--
»www.gobpl.com |
|
David95037
join:2003-04-16
Morgan Hill, CA
·Be There
| reply to SquareSlinky
Re: Tried and failed - worldwide
said by SquareSlinky :
Has there been any technical advances in 10 years?
Succeed or fail, it is worth a try.
(and it isn't my money, so why not)
Sorry the laws of physics don’t change.
The only advance has been the avalanche of hype.
And where do the electric utilities get the money? You do pay your bill? |
|
COMMAN
Plug Me In
join:2000-07-17
Mount Juliet, TN
·Embarq
 ·Vonage
| reply to David95037
Re: Aircraft radios - serious interference from BPL
said by David95037 :
...raises serious questions of negligence by the FCC commissioners.
As those of us in the Broadcast industry know, the FCC has been the "business partner" of Clear Channel and other large corporations for several years now; it's been many years since the FCC applied their original mandate - to serve the public interest. As mentioned in the Philly article about Verizon, the telcos have received millions - in some cases billions - to provide the infrastructure to serve ALL of their customers with broadband access. For a FAR smaller amount of money than BPL deployment, every copper phone line could be upgraded to handle DSL. For all of the funding and tax breaks the telcos have received, it SHOULD have already been done.
BUT, as the telcos (and cable companies in some cases) don't see a suitable profit from these rural areas, municipal efforts and private enterprise WILL come into the picture in a bigger way. Since we will all be getting our internet, phone, TV, and maybe more from one "wire" one day, each day these "incumbent providers" delay in providing these services is just one day closer to their extinction. Now I for one wouldn't mind seeing that day come soon. Having spent plenty of (wonderful) time in rural areas, I sympathize with the desire to see BPL work, but better solutions are coming - thanks to the hardships today, they hopefully won't say "Bell" in the name (or Sprint, Verizon, etc.)! |
|
rogue_
I Have A Secret Window
Premium
join:2001-10-17
Lake Hiawatha, NJ
| It will come.. just a matter of time
Frequency is math.
And as we all know, it just takes an intelligent person to come up with the right math. Right now we have 'creative' people working out the math.
--
Bozone (n.): The substance surrounding stupid people that stops bright ideas from penetrating. |
|
