"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

I'd be curious to know how vunerable BPL is to interference. I have no
doubt the BPL people have run tests, and I'm a little surprised they're
not
at the front of a webpage somewhere.

No sir, the BPL clods have *not* done much if any interfernce testing
wherein lies the underlying reason for whole uproar and is the reason
you can't find info on their "tests" online. It's all explained in
depth and well documented in the ARRL website.



When I wrote "vunerable BPL is to interference", I meant how outside sources
of interference would effect the performance of BPL. Sorry if I wasn't
clear. I still have no doubt the BPL people would test for things like
that. I wouldn't expect them to care much about interference, as long as
they can fit it into some interpretation of Part 15 regs. Or if they can
get the Part 15 regs changed. Or if they don't get caught violating the
Part 15 regs. I was wondering if there's any test results explaining how
marvelously robust this BPL system is going to be.

If you know where this is all explained in depth and well documented, please
point me in that direction.





And nothing will help as much as bringing new people into the radio
hobby.

By the time that might happen BPL will either have taken over the HF
spectrum or been forgotten as another idiotic and failed dotcom
maneuver.


BPL might very well fail. Or it might hang on in a few communities. I have
no idea. I'm sure, now that crackpot powerline schemes are here, they will
never really go away.


Far beyond the question of hams interfering with BPL comes the much
more important question of BPL interfering with the long list of
licensed incumbent HF users. Within that group radio hobbyists are
basically bit players. Smart and noisy bit players but nonetheless bit
players. Other users are *not* bit players and them's the folks who I
expect will quietly and decisively torpedo BPL.


w3rv

Maybe, but much of the utility SW use has gone to sattelites. The bands are
far quiter now than they were 30 years ago. Of course, I've got my own
crackpot idea. The SW spectrum should be run rather like the way we run the
National Parks. Everyone is free to use SW radio, as long as they act in a
responsible manner.

If only Boy Scouts could go to Yellowstone, only Boy Scouts would care about
Yellowstone.

Frank Dresser

"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...
Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Mike Coslo" wrote in message
...

Have any of these Genii given any though of what would happen to bpl
during solar event?

Maybe the FCC can serve an enforcement letter to the sun! 8^)

- Mike KB3EIA -



Or how about some high intensity E-skip. 70 over 9 broadband crap
inputing someone elses system. Gotta be fun.

Of course they didn't think it out. If they did it would never have
made it
to this stage.

BINGO!

The reason that lights and motors work well enough is that they aren't
affected by the junk that gets impressed on the power lines.

And finally, just finally, I wonder exactly HOW the power companies are
going to respond to the problems of their OWN RFI generation?

Lessee, lets look at the enforcement letters from the FCC. Many of them
are to power providers because of equipment that is interfering with
some ham somewhere. It has to get to the enforcement stage, for crying
out loud. So are the Power companies going to replace all those
transfprmers and other power line junk that is spewing out RFI for the
BPL'ers?

- Mike KB3EIA -


The power companies are not going to do a damn thing that will cost them
money. I have been fighting with ALA Power for 5 years and still don't have
it ALL gone.

All these complaint letters began with me, BTW. I got the ARRL and Riley
involved and they jumped on the bandwagon. But it STILL isn't fixed.

So when they put BPL into this mess there own RFI will trash their new found
toy. Can't wait. Gess its gonna be like a snake eating its own tail.

And with their track record it will be fun to watch...As they destroy HF in
the process.

Dan/W4NTI

Jim:
Even BEFORE they start this BPL thing, the existing power lines emanate a
ton of interference anyways. It is almost impossible for me to listen to
anything HF around here because the lines around here are terrible. I can
only imagine how much worse it will get with adding the BPL stuff as well.
I am definitely a proponent of having the utilities switching (albeit
expensive) to buried electrical lines. Only exception might be where the
lines need to cross a river etc.


--
Ryan, KC8PMX
FF1-FF2-MFR-(pending NREMT-B!)
--. --- -.. ... .- -. --. . .-.. ... .- .-. . ..-. .. .-. . ..-.
... --. .... - . .-. ...
"Jim Hampton" wrote in message
...
David,

Looks like I'm going to have to research some nice linear as well as a
decent HF station. I had been looking at a vertical to avoid all of the
horizontal lines in the neighborhood, but, on second thought ... 1500
watts
horizontally polarized, 50 feet from the power lines might prove
interesting
:)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA
ps - we need a study as to where the biggest ingress will occur :)


"David Stinson" wrote in message
...

Money talks, public service walks- BPL is a certainty.

The "null it out- anyone can do it" argument is crap-
works well in theory, poorly in the field.
Even with excellent nulling, QRP and other weak signal work is finished.
Shortwave DXing is finished.

You have three choices-
Give up radio.
Move far enough into the country to avoid the polluted grid,
"Gorilla warfare-" Power lines that leak out, can also leak IN.
50 watts of broadband noise generator plugged into the nearest socket
would do. Note that I would never advocate anything illegal.....
D.S.


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/19/03

Larry Roll K3LT wrote:
... Do you have any idea
how many lawyers the big electric utilities can afford to get on your case?

They won't get much, Larry.
Nothing left of my arse but scar tissue....
73 Dave

Hans,

Do you think insulated 10 gauge ladder line from a 3 KW tuner plugged into
the electric stove outlet might make a good antenna? For experimentation
only, of course :)

73 from Rochester, NY
Jim AA2QA


"K0HB" wrote in message
m...

BPL works on conducted signals, not radiated signals. The power grid
is an incredibly poor receiving antenna, so any microvolt-level or
even millivolt-level signal from "out there" won't even show up on the
copper.

73, de Hans, K0HB
--
"Reality doesn't care what you believe." -- K0HB


---
Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
Version: 6.0.512 / Virus Database: 309 - Release Date: 8/20/03

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message ...
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

I'd be curious to know how vunerable BPL is to interference. I have no
doubt the BPL people have run tests, and I'm a little surprised they're
not
at the front of a webpage somewhere.

No sir, the BPL clods have *not* done much if any interfernce testing
wherein lies the underlying reason for whole uproar and is the reason
you can't find info on their "tests" online. It's all explained in
depth and well documented in the ARRL website.



When I wrote "vunerable BPL is to interference", I meant how outside sources
of interference would effect the performance of BPL. Sorry if I wasn't
clear.

No problem, I understood what you meant.

I still have no doubt the BPL people would test for things like
that. I wouldn't expect them to care much about interference, as long as
they can fit it into some interpretation of Part 15 regs. Or if they can
get the Part 15 regs changed. Or if they don't get caught violating the
Part 15 regs. I was wondering if there's any test results explaining how
marvelously robust this BPL system is going to be.

If you know where this is all explained in depth and well documented, please
point me in that direction.

From http://www.arrl.org/news/stories/2003/08/21/4/?nc=1

"The League also noted that comments in the proceeding so far have
been silent on the interference susceptibility of BPL to ham radio
signal ingress. The League predicted that even as little as 250 mW of
signal induced into overhead power lines some 100 feet from an amateur
antenna could degrade a BPL system or render it inoperative."

I realize that this is not the statement about actual tests run by the
BPL people which you'd like to see, they haven't published *any* test
results at all, but the League technical guys are pretty sharp and I
doubt they'd make a statement like this if that didn't have a good
basis for making it.

And nothing will help as much as bringing new people into the radio
hobby.

By the time that might happen BPL will either have taken over the HF
spectrum or been forgotten as another idiotic and failed dotcom
maneuver.


BPL might very well fail. Or it might hang on in a few communities. I have
no idea. I'm sure, now that crackpot powerline schemes are here, they will
never really go away.

Heh. Yeah, the recent grid debacle is not setting a very good stage
for a huggy kissy relationship between the BPL types and *anybody*
else including the FCC. I've seen some economic analyses of BPL and
from the standpoint of an investor BPL is a big go-nowhere dud.


Far beyond the question of hams interfering with BPL comes the much
more important question of BPL interfering with the long list of
licensed incumbent HF users. Within that group radio hobbyists are
basically bit players. Smart and noisy bit players but nonetheless bit
players. Other users are *not* bit players and them's the folks who I
expect will quietly and decisively torpedo BPL.


w3rv

Maybe, but much of the utility SW use has gone to sattelites. The bands are
far quiter now than they were 30 years ago.

That's quite true. But we can't hear HF listeners and we can't
normally tune some modes but they're out there and apparently in
profusion. We almost didn't get any 60M band at all because certain
feds didn't want hams on "their HF frequencies". I dunno who they are,
those freqs appear dead when ya tune around. But they're there. FBI,
CIA, NSA, FCC, the military?


Of course, I've got my own
crackpot idea. The SW spectrum should be run rather like the way we run the
National Parks.

From a post I launched in RRAP on 8 Feb 2000:

- - - - -

W3RV
"There isn't enough bandwidth in all the HF ham bands combined to pull
off the kinds of ham technology development work we'll see in the
coming years, much of it undoubtedly will be done by nocode computer
jocks on the millimeter bands. Code tests have been a no-counter wrt
to "fostering ham radio as a tehnical hobby" for the past nine years".

K4YZ:
and that HF is for recreation, period.

W3RV:
"PRECISELY: If I had my druthers I'd have the regulation of HF ham
radio moved over to the National Park Service and let the geeks screw
around with the FCC."

- - - - -

Heh!

Everyone is free to use SW radio, as long as they act in a
responsible manner.

NO WAY!!

If only Boy Scouts could go to Yellowstone, only Boy Scouts would care about
Yellowstone.

Frank Dresser

w3rv

David Stinson wrote:
Larry Roll K3LT wrote:

... Do you have any idea
how many lawyers the big electric utilities can afford to get on your case?


They won't get much, Larry.
Nothing left of my arse but scar tissue....
73 Dave

waaaaaay too much information!!!

- Mike KB3EIA -

In rec.radio.amateur.policy Frank Dresser wrote:

When I wrote "vunerable BPL is to interference", I meant how outside sources
of interference would effect the performance of BPL. Sorry if I wasn't

[..]

If you know where this is all explained in depth and well documented, please
point me in that direction.

I don`t know the details, but here in Europe several pilot projects
were basically stopped and several larger companies got out of that
technology again, after trying to hype it for several years.

I do not know if this is due to unreliability or due to other factors,
but it *seems* to have worked better in the lab than in the real world.
If enough problems make it too unreliable and/or expensive, this might
be the easiest way out.

There *are* some companies still trying to bring this to market though
(my local utility does).

/ralph

"Ralph Aichinger" wrote in message
...

I don`t know the details, but here in Europe several pilot projects
were basically stopped and several larger companies got out of that
technology again, after trying to hype it for several years.

I do not know if this is due to unreliability or due to other factors,
but it *seems* to have worked better in the lab than in the real world.
If enough problems make it too unreliable and/or expensive, this might
be the easiest way out.

There *are* some companies still trying to bring this to market though
(my local utility does).

/ralph

Yeah. As proposed, it might have too many problems to go into widespread
use. However, if the biggest problem is their signal to noise ratio, they
might fix it by boosting their signal. Let's hope not!

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" analogdial@worldnet

If radio were open to the public, there would be thousands more
people who give a damn about radio. And any politican will desire
the support of thousands who give a damn every bit as much as
he desires a snappy wardrobe and a full head of hair.




Hey Frank, where'd you ever get the idea that radio *isn't* open to
the public?
I never knew anyone whatever who wanted a ham radio license who was
barred from getting one. There is a small matter of qualifying for it,
of course, as there is in every endeavor where others can and will be
impacted when the licensee knows not which way is up. But it has
always been open to all comers.

Now if you're talking "open" like CB is open, that's a horse of an
entirely different color.

Dick