"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
"James Wilson" wrote in message
...
What does BPL sound like? Can someone post a wav file somewhere so it
can
be identified?


The ARRL website is loaded with video and/or audio files which will
clearly demonstrate what the various forms of BPL signals sound like
and the havoc they generate throughout the HF spectrum.

http://www.arrl.org/tis/info/HTML/plc/#Video

That helps a lot. I see what was meant by "geiger counter" sound now, as
well as the other sort of noise.

I do have a spectrum analyzer here, so that will help, when the day comes.
At the moment, the only broadband available here is DSL or cable modem,
which have been well-behaved neighbors. I'm using a cable modem now, and I
don't notice anything from it, even when I tune into the bands that it uses.
We have regular overflights scanning for leakage, so it appears that Comcast
is making the effort.

Any hope of us non-arrl members getting something to listen to?

Nevermind, a later post answered this.

"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...
(N2EY) wrote in message
...
In article , "Kim W5TIT"

writes:

"N2EY" wrote in message
...
In article , "Ryan,
KC8PMX"
writes:

Just found out today listening to a local, reputable radio station
that
Bay,
Saginaw and Midland Counties in Michigan are going to be "test
sites" for
BPL, at least for Michigan. I don't know when it will be an actual
reality,
as opposed to being in the planning stages, but will keep current
with
their
project!

Ryan,

If you have a 6 meter rig that can go mobile, you're set up to
measure/observe
(and report) BPL interference.

73 de Jim, N2EY

heh heh. Yeah, and any ham worth being a ham would have a 6-meter rig
that
can go mobile so they can measure/observe (and report) BPL
interference.
Right?

IIRC, Ryan has mentioned being active on 6 meters. So there's a good
chance he
has such a rig already.

FWIW I haven't run into any documented instances of BPL operating as
high as 50 Mhz yet. The BPL signals I've listened to in the Emmaus PA
ran between 3 Mhz to somewhere just above 22 Mhz. That's pretty narrow
by "broadband standards". If/when they get more users doing who knows
what I suppose the BPL band edges will expand both up & down.

73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv

Lets see now...3 to 22 Mhz.....80/75, 40, 30, 20, 17 and 15 meters turned
into a wideband wasteland. With plans to expand to 12, 10, and six meters.
Yep...thats a real good thing.

We could all go to 160 and fight the 50/9 QRN most of the year, or 12 and
ten which are dead during the low of the cycle, which we are heading for.

Yep, lots to look forward to.

Dan/W4NTI

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...


I seriously doubt the economics of BPL will ever bring it where I
live, even if it is approved, but others need to know.


That may indeed be true. However it will certainly make it tougher for you
to communicate with someone in an area that is trashed by BPL.

Dan/W4NTI

Dan/W4NTI wrote:
"Brian Kelly" wrote in message
om...

(N2EY) wrote in message

...

In article , "Kim W5TIT"



writes:


"N2EY" wrote in message
...

In article , "Ryan,

KC8PMX"

writes:


Just found out today listening to a local, reputable radio station

that

Bay,

Saginaw and Midland Counties in Michigan are going to be "test

sites" for

BPL, at least for Michigan. I don't know when it will be an actual

reality,

as opposed to being in the planning stages, but will keep current

with

their

project!

Ryan,

If you have a 6 meter rig that can go mobile, you're set up to

measure/observe

(and report) BPL interference.

73 de Jim, N2EY

heh heh. Yeah, and any ham worth being a ham would have a 6-meter rig

that

can go mobile so they can measure/observe (and report) BPL

interference.

Right?

IIRC, Ryan has mentioned being active on 6 meters. So there's a good

chance he

has such a rig already.

FWIW I haven't run into any documented instances of BPL operating as
high as 50 Mhz yet. The BPL signals I've listened to in the Emmaus PA
ran between 3 Mhz to somewhere just above 22 Mhz. That's pretty narrow
by "broadband standards". If/when they get more users doing who knows
what I suppose the BPL band edges will expand both up & down.


73 de Jim, N2EY

w3rv


Lets see now...3 to 22 Mhz.....80/75, 40, 30, 20, 17 and 15 meters turned
into a wideband wasteland. With plans to expand to 12, 10, and six meters.
Yep...thats a real good thing.

We could all go to 160 and fight the 50/9 QRN most of the year, or 12 and
ten which are dead during the low of the cycle, which we are heading for.

Yep, lots to look forward to.

Dan/W4NTI


Dan,

Why don't you be the first to QSY to those bands so we don't have to
listen to your crap on 20 and 75!

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...

After having gone to the ARRL site and listened to the examples, all I
can say is it sounds just like precipitation static and/or loose
connections. No way would I be able to identify one from the other.
I'm just going to have to complain every time I hear noise and make
recordings. If it's noisy enough to be a problem it should be fixed.

Any hope of us non-arrl members getting something to listen to?



I wasn't aware you had to be a member to go klik on the link to the BPL
file. Go check and see.

Dan/W4NTI

In article , "Ryan, KC8PMX"
writes:

Yeah Jim.... six meter all mode.

I made a lucky guess.

It's hard as hell to use it right now with
the powerline interference in this freakin' county even before they
implement this whole BPL stuff!!!!!

Oh man...they can't even keep the lines quiet without BPL...

Perhaps their own line noise will mess up BPL performance.

73 de Jim, N2EY

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...
Carl R. Stevenson wrote:

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...

[snip]

You raise an interesting question, Carl. How exactly should the
average ham go about proving that the RFI is indeed BPL, when the BPL
people say
"That's not us!'??



BPL has a unique "signature" (in the spectral/time domains) that can be
used to ID it.

Since there are different systems (SS from main.net and OFDM from
Amperion,
for example) they have different signatures, which are distinct from
other
sources
of interference and more traditional power line noise (of course the
utilities are
responsible for fixing the latter, too ... though their record is poor).


So to repeat, how does the average ham, whom you have exhorted to
"make sure it's BPL that you're complaining about", go about detecting
and sorting which is what, given that spectral analysis gear, and the
training to use it if it was available, is virtually nonexistnt in the
average hamshack? Is there a aural signature or more than one for the
different BPL modes? Is the Emmaus test site video/audio clip
reresentative enough to make the call, or is something more needed?

The Emmaus test site video (test area #3) should be pretty representative
of the "main.net" system ... test area #4 is the Amperion OFDM system.
There could be others that might have different "signatures" ...


I expect that if it was indeed BPL RFI it would follow the power grid
pretty closely with signal strength highest when close, and tapering off
with distance away from the lines. But from the one report posted here
of a ham who said he heard it from a distance of 60 miles, seems like
propagation will play into the picture-to be expected at HF as all
experienced HF ham operators know. Or maybe *he* mis-identified it!

I suspect that may be the case ... though it's not impossible that under
ideal conditions of terrain, propagation, with good antenna, etc. that
it *might* be detectable at some distance ... whether current levels of
deployment would cause truly "harmful interference" at such a distance
requires further study.

So who do hams call for assistance, the ARRL? I haven't seen anything
from them suggesting that.

My recommendation would be to e-mail a .wav file or other common
audio file format to Ed Hare, , and give him the particulars
of time, location, if you *know* that your utility is doing a BPL trial,
etc.
(I'd appreciate a cc: of the audio file and particulars to my main e-mail
address as well, just for my own information and
analysis.)

The MAIN thing is to NOT have a bunch of false "BPL interference
complaints."
The BPL industry is trying to paint the ARS as "exaggerating the potential
for
interference" and doing a lot of hand-waving ... inaccurate claims of "BPL
interference" at this point will do more harm than good.

Carl -wk3c

"Dave VanHorn" wrote in message
...

After having gone to the ARRL site and listened to the examples, all I
can say is it sounds just like precipitation static and/or loose
connections. No way would I be able to identify one from the other.
I'm just going to have to complain every time I hear noise and make
recordings. If it's noisy enough to be a problem it should be fixed.

Any hope of us non-arrl members getting something to listen to?

Dave,

The ARRL video is not in the "members only" part of the site ...
it's easy to find from the articles on BPL in the public area.

Carl - wk3c

"Dick Carroll" wrote in message
...
Dave VanHorn wrote:
After having gone to the ARRL site and listened to the examples, all I
can say is it sounds just like precipitation static and/or loose
connections. No way would I be able to identify one from the other.
I'm just going to have to complain every time I hear noise and make
recordings. If it's noisy enough to be a problem it should be fixed.


Any hope of us non-arrl members getting something to listen to?




Surely that file isn't on the members-only side of the site, is it?

Certainly it shouldn't be, and if so I intend to protest.


It isn't Dick ... it's open to the world.

Carl - wk3c