One of the simplest and most positive tests is to turn the BPL service on and
off and observe changes in interference, thus identifying if BPL is the
source.
But to my knowledge no BPL test site has done such tests.

I have done just that in Emmaus, PA and in Potomac, MD. The correlation
between the noise heard and the download of files by users was perfect. NTIA
did testing in the same two cities, but working with the utility companies to
do just that -- turn the system on and off. And even after working with NTIA
in Potomac, a PPL representative had the gall to tell a local newspaper
reporter that Carl and I had heard "neon signs" in the residential
neighborhood.

What about harmonics? The BPL signals on the video sounded like they had
pretty fast risetimes.

What sounds fast on a receiver will generate modulation sidebands up and down
the band, but not harmonics. I have heard harmonics in the trail areas,
perhaps down about 30-40 dB. Our 1500-watt stations can have 50 milliwatt
harmonics, so we may not want to point our fingers in that direction. :-)

Because different systems are being tried in different locations, proponents
of each system will probably proclaim the *their* system doesn't have that
problem - what you heard at the Podunk site is Brand X BPL.

Yup, been tried. Ironically, the least cooperative BPL manufacturer's system
was actually the most benign. Had they worked with me instead of turning it off
when they knew I was coming, their marketing folks could have made hay.

73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI

Go to the ARRL site for the complete list of known test areas.

Actually they aren't there (yet). I do have a pretty good set of
documentation, including streets in most cases, but am not posting it.
Although cooperation has been slow, we are starting to see some cooperation
from some electric utility companies. One of the promises I make to them is
that ARRL will work with them to help them understand the interference
potential, but we will do so in the least-destructive way possible. Having
hordes of angry hams swarming around the trial areas would not meet that goal.

Here are the known cities:

Birmingham, AL area
Cullman, AL (may be concluded)
Bay area, CA (5 GHz-only system!)
Atlanta, GA area
Honolulu, HI
Boise, ID
Potomac, MD
Cape Girardea, MO
Raleigh, NC
Briarcliff Manor/Ossining, NY (Westchester Cty)
Dublin, OH
Hyde Park, OH
Bethlehem, PA (new - just getting started)
Emmaus, PA
Whitehall, PA
Azle, TX (new, little data available)
Manassas, VA

If hams live in those areas and can help, contact me at .

73,
Ed Hare, W1RFI

"Phil Kane" wrote in message . net...
On 15 Oct 2003 22:30:17 -0700, Brian Kelly wrote:

This means that the manufacturer is required to test them to
ensure that they comply with the FCC regulations. Under the present
rules, they must be tested at 3 typical locations. "

What's the FCC definition of "typical locations"??

De facto: any place where the results support the stand that one is
advocating.

Oh golly, I would never have guessed that . .