In article , "Carl R. Stevenson"
writes:

It's also interesting that Mr. Nye points us to the websites of folks
who are advocating BPL ...

Yup.

I wonder, is Mr. Nye a consultant to the utilities or BPL manufacturers?

I think you just outed him.....

I live just outside of Emmaus, PA, (test site #3 in Ed Hare's video).
While I am currently far enough away from the limited deployment
that I cannot detect it here at my QTH, I have gone down to the
area with my FT-817 and can verify that the noise is HORRIBLE.

Your detailed firsthand comments to FCC are much-needed in the fight, Carl.
Theory is great but having lots of hams say "I was there and it raised the
noise floor XX db 160-6" is even better.

And IIRC the demos are meeting Part 15, and the BPL folks want to RAISE the
allowable levels!!

Did DSL or cable get that sort of gimmee? I don't think so!! If the utilities
want to get into the broadband game, let 'em play by the same rules as
everybody else.

I shudder to think what havoc large-scale deployments would bring.

Would make our codetest debates kinda moot, huh? And don't forget that access
BPL goes up to 80 MHz on fundamentals. Harmonics, anyone?

Despite Mr. Nye's allegations of "FUD" ... the ARRL is right on
this one.

AGREED!

I say the stuff about "coherent noise" is simply a smokescreen to divert away
from the real issue. Which is simply that BPL puts out a lot of noise that will
cause harmful interference to all licensed users of the affected spectrum. And
this interference is totally avoidable by using better technology, like "PBL".

Do you agree, Carl?

73 de Jim, N2EY

btw, how far from the test site do you have to get before the BPL noise
disappears?