plattypus1
join:2005-04-08
Riverside, CA | Good luck...
I'm only a no-code tech, but my sympathies go out to HF users in southern california.
Good luck, guys. -KF6CZG |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| said by plattypus1  :I'm only a no-code tech, but my sympathies go out to HF users in southern california. Code or no-code, Tech or Extra, you're still an Amateur and one of us  |
|
Slacker44
join:2001-05-10
Gilbert, AZ
| One thing I don't understand. I would say most of the problem people have is with emergency situations. The simple answer to that would be to have a law or rule to turn off the BPL in that area during those situations. Why wouldn't that solve the problem people have with BPL in those situations? |
|
Darkk
join:2003-10-03
Almont, MI
 ·Charter Pipeline
2 edits | said by Slacker44 :One thing I don't understand. I would say most of the problem people have is with emergency situations. The simple answer to that would be to have a law or rule to turn off the BPL in that area during those situations. Why wouldn't that solve the problem people have with BPL in those situations? And how much incentive is there for a Ham to spend many thousands of dollars for equipment and antennas they never get to use. Do you think they'll do that to see it gathering dust until some emergency?
No way to test the equipment, no way to keep sharp, practice handling traffic for emergencies?
How many people would own a car and park it for use only during emergencies?
Look at all of the folks in New Orleans who didn't have cars squirreled away just so they cold use them in an emergency. They had trouble getting out of town.
It isn't just Hams, it's government, marine, FEMA, military, and more that use HF.
Additionally, far off BPL installations will add to the overall noise floor of the HF band in use. This makes communications in the affected area difficult, even if the local BPL carrier would shut down.
Do you think, really, that any BPL carrier is ever going to shut down someone's Internet for an emergency? It'll never happen. Remember that these BPL carriers are Part 15 users, they are supposed to stop using BPL if there is interference, but will they? Past experience has shown that they won't.
BPL is a bad idea from a technical standpoint as currently implemented. It is an unlicensed service interfering with licensed users. By the very nature of how it currently works and how the power grid (poorly maintained as it is) is designed, according to the laws of physics BPL must cause interference. And it does.
Let's just hope none of our pension plans have much invested in Enron, er... I mean Ambient and other similar BPL technologies. |
|
rf_engineer
join:2003-08-04
USA
| reply to Slacker44
said by Slacker44 :One thing I don't understand. I would say most of the problem people have is with emergency situations. The simple answer to that would be to have a law or rule to turn off the BPL in that area during those situations. Why wouldn't that solve the problem people have with BPL in those situations? During the FCC NPRM (Notice of Proposed Rulemaking) comment period, BPL carriers complained about having to register their systems in a public database. Carriers didn't even want to commit to any specific timeframe to investigate and resolve interference issues or have someone available 7x24 to answer the phone, so it's doubtful they'll agree to turn off their entire system with one phone call.
Even if such an emergency "off switch" were implemented, it would have to be on a national level. HF stations in a disaster area may communicate with anyone in the US, or beyond. BPL interference is a local phenomenon, but a BPL system in Peoria can make for problems with someone passing health and welfare traffic from Katrina if the person receiving the traffic is in Peoria.
Don't expect the FCC to mandate the off switch anytime soon. This would pretty much make the FCC look like a bunch of buffoons who made bad decision in allowing BPL to continue (and confirm what many are saying ). |
|
w2co
join:2003-07-16
Longmont, CO
| Yes that is absolutely true but also no one ever mentions the fact that the BPL noise in Peoria could also skip via the ionosphere to CA., or N.Y., or even New Orleans. None of these companies have done any testing in this area, it would take years of data to predict exactly how far the BPL noise could travel given certain band conditions (which are always changing). A low power signal of only 1 watt can travel to Europe and Africa and even Japan on 14-28 Mhz. This is right in the middle of the broadband BPL signal, and if it were deployed widely, all the medium voltage wires that it is traveling on would add in random directions to create a much more powerful signal. To predict the direction and power levels in any direction would be highly complex and the companies could not handle this level of competence. Just another fact that no one ever talks about even the responsible companies pushing the trash. |
|
