"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...


Sure we will. All we need to is put up KW level beacon stations.

End of BPL.

Dan/W4NTI



Why would that end BPL?

Frank Dresser

Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a
vertical-
radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass
sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots
of QSO's, and
have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice
about it.
Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at

the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting.
N4GL

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...


Sure we will. All we need to is put up KW level beacon stations.

End of BPL.

Dan/W4NTI



Why would that end BPL?

Frank Dresser

"Walter Treftz" wrote in message
...
Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a
vertical-
radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass
sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots
of QSO's, and
have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice
about it.
Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at

the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting.
N4GL



Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago?

I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given
the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on
the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking
somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference.

But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a
technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas
were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any
candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE
FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE
TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR
POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political
misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics
turns into a numbers game.


How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this
goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to
count.

Frank Dresser

Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Walter Treftz" wrote in message
...
Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a
vertical-
radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass
sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots
of QSO's, and
have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice
about it.
Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at

the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting.
N4GL


Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago?

I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given
the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on
the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking
somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference.

But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a
technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas
were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any
candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE
FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE
TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR
POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political
misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics
turns into a numbers game.

How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this
goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to
count.

Frank Dresser

Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Walter Treftz" wrote in message
...
Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a
vertical-
radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass
sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots
of QSO's, and
have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice
about it.
Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at

the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting.
N4GL


Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago?

I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given
the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on
the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking
somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference.

But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a
technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas
were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any
candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE
FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE
TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR
POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political
misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics
turns into a numbers game.

How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this
goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to
count.

Frank Dresser

Don't know about BPL, but VDSL goes from 138KHz to 12MHz and has 4096 tones. Not as much potential for a problem, as it's all twisted pair rather than power lines.

Frank Dresser wrote:

"Walter Treftz" wrote in message
...
Here's what we do --- we built a (legal) KW rig into a van, install a
vertical-
radiating antenna, cut out the roof and replace it with a fiberglass
sheet. Drive directly underneath a power line with BPL running. Run lots
of QSO's, and
have at it. We're legal. Induced RF just might make them think twice
about it.
Yes, I know Ashcrofts boys are reading this --- Hi, muthers -- I live at

the callbook address. Bring some beer when you come visiting.
N4GL


Do you mean the way CBers made channel 5 unwatchable 25 years ago?

I don't know much about BPL, but I think the TV analogy might hold. Given
the bandwidth of BPL, there must be dozens, maybe hundreds of channels on
the powerline. Can every one, or most of them, be wiped out? I'm thinking
somebody came up with some pretty robust ways to deal with interference.

But what if it does stop BPL? BPL isn't being backed because it's a
technically elegant system. It's being backed by politics. Rural areas
were critically important in the last Presidential election, and any
candidiate would love to say something like "MY OPPONENT IS STOPPING ONE
FORM OF HIGH SPEED INTERNET DISTRIBUTION ON BEHALF OF HIS PALS IN THE
TELECOMMUNCATIONS INDUSTRY, BUT I PROMISE TO BRING IT IN, RIGHT ON YOUR
POWER LINE, AS SOON AS I'M ELECTED!!" Of course, that would be a political
misrepresentation, but politicans get away with worse every day. Politics
turns into a numbers game.

How many politicians or bureaucrats are saying anything negative about this
goofy scheme? Politicians may not know physics, but they do know how to
count.

Frank Dresser

"Frank Dresser" wrote in message
...

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...


Sure we will. All we need to is put up KW level beacon stations.

End of BPL.

Dan/W4NTI



Why would that end BPL?

Frank Dresser



The transmission lines are radiators. As such they will also receive.

Power lines are right up next to the rigs. The RF from the radios will
trash the BPL. Probably by causing drop outs and adding lots of extra
delays. Basically it will make BPL useless anywhere near a ham station.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dan/W4NTI" w4nti@get rid of this mindspring.com wrote in message
link.net...


The transmission lines are radiators. As such they will also receive.

Power lines are right up next to the rigs. The RF from the radios will
trash the BPL. Probably by causing drop outs and adding lots of extra
delays. Basically it will make BPL useless anywhere near a ham station.

Dan/W4NTI



OK, let's say it does slow or even stop BPL near a ham station. Why
wouldn't the FCC restrict amatuer operations around BPL areas?

Frank Dresser

OK, let's say it does slow or even stop BPL near a ham station. Why
wouldn't the FCC restrict amatuer operations around BPL areas?



Hmmm. That would be real interesting. The FCC restricting the use of
lawfully licensed transmitters in order to accomodate Part15 unlicensed
operations of incidental radiators.....


Ed WB6SAT

Ed G. wrote:

OK, let's say it does slow or even stop BPL near a ham station. Why
wouldn't the FCC restrict amatuer operations around BPL areas?




Hmmm. That would be real interesting. The FCC restricting the use of
lawfully licensed transmitters in order to accomodate Part15 unlicensed
operations of incidental radiators.....


Ed WB6SAT

They'll modify the rules so it fits their agenda. remember, the FCC
will do anything that can make them $$$$ for the US Treasury.

73

Frank K3EKO