We have a BPL test going on in our area. Has anyone experience interferance from a BPL test on their radio systems? If you have: what type of interferance, what band, who did you report it to?
Thanks
Gary
WA1MOW
BPL Interferance
Moderator: Queue Moderator
-
Tom in D.C.
- Posts: 3859
- Joined: Tue Sep 04, 2001 4:00 pm
- What radios do you own?: Progreso soup can with CRT
BPL
Frank:
I just got off a polite but hot letter to the president of our electric coop in Nelson County (Wintergreen) because they're about to start selling BPL access. After all the negative publicity that BPL has gotten it's hard to understand why CVEC would charge ahead with it. Maybe being in Nelson County they're so far out in the sticks that they don't know what's going on, but I doubt it. I'll let you know what kind of reply I get back. I also cited PEPCO's decision not to go ahead with BPL. I honestly don't understand how/why people can be so pigheaded on a clear-cut matter, and that includes the FCC and Chairman Powell.
Regards,
I just got off a polite but hot letter to the president of our electric coop in Nelson County (Wintergreen) because they're about to start selling BPL access. After all the negative publicity that BPL has gotten it's hard to understand why CVEC would charge ahead with it. Maybe being in Nelson County they're so far out in the sticks that they don't know what's going on, but I doubt it. I'll let you know what kind of reply I get back. I also cited PEPCO's decision not to go ahead with BPL. I honestly don't understand how/why people can be so pigheaded on a clear-cut matter, and that includes the FCC and Chairman Powell.
Regards,
Tom in D.C.
In 1920, the U.S. Post Office Department ruled
that children may not be sent by parcel post.
In 1920, the U.S. Post Office Department ruled
that children may not be sent by parcel post.
BPL information
Apparently the City of Manassas, Va has been offering BPL in the city for about a year or so. I haven't heard of interference there, has anyone heard of it? Look for all electric coopertives to get into the BPL business. Their associations are pushing this.
BPL the best thing since sliced bread???
to verify my last post check out
http://www.nrtc.coop/us/main/nrtc_updat ... 092204.pdf
http://www.nrtc.coop/us/main/nrtc_updat ... 092204.pdf
-
440roadrunner
- Posts: 236
- Joined: Mon Aug 16, 2004 3:47 pm
Just my 2 cents, but I think some of us amateurs are taking the wrong approach--namely, to protect our amateur bands--which the bPl Pushers insist that they can "notch out."
What about WWV? Maybe we should all become avid shortwave broadcast listeners. What about all the other HF communications, including aircraft and military?
Somebody in Bush's Buddies WANTS this, maybe Bush himself. It seems that the thems are intent on pushing this down our throats no matter what.
(It should not have taken more than a couple of studies to show that this was a spectral pollution nightmare, and they should have been over with a long time ago.)
Last, you can link up to about Ten Tons of info by searching Google, among other things, for W1RFI
73, Delar W7DJM
What about WWV? Maybe we should all become avid shortwave broadcast listeners. What about all the other HF communications, including aircraft and military?
Somebody in Bush's Buddies WANTS this, maybe Bush himself. It seems that the thems are intent on pushing this down our throats no matter what.
(It should not have taken more than a couple of studies to show that this was a spectral pollution nightmare, and they should have been over with a long time ago.)
Last, you can link up to about Ten Tons of info by searching Google, among other things, for W1RFI
73, Delar W7DJM
BPL in it's current incarnation has LOTS of problems. It's susceptible to noise, it's susceptible to interference, it needs repeaters every 500' or so to keep pushing the signal along, the overall speed is slow, etc. etc.
It was touted as a "rural broadband saviour" because the telcos and cablecos wouldn't service these people. Unfortunately that'll never happen. The per capita costs are too high.
It was touted as a "rural broadband saviour" because the telcos and cablecos wouldn't service these people. Unfortunately that'll never happen. The per capita costs are too high.
Just think for a minute, why would the FCC want a internet system that radiates thru the airwaves. easy answer, so that it can be monitored from remote distances, that is most likely the only reason that the Govt. is pushing it so hard. Prior to 9/11 it didn't even exist and suddenly in the last 3 years it is the newest thing, forget about cable modems and point to point microwave systems that are hard to tap into along with other systems that do not radiate at all or minimally, the governments want a radiating internet system so that they may easily monitor it plain and simple.
Sorry I'm on my rant again, I'm all done for now.
Mike
Sorry I'm on my rant again, I'm all done for now.
Mike
The government doesn't need to monitor the internet with "RF" receivers, they do it now, in real time.mike m wrote:Just think for a minute, why would the FCC want a internet system that radiates thru the airwaves. easy answer, so that it can be monitored from remote distances, that is most likely the only reason that the Govt. is pushing it so hard. Prior to 9/11 it didn't even exist and suddenly in the last 3 years it is the newest thing, forget about cable modems and point to point microwave systems that are hard to tap into along with other systems that do not radiate at all or minimally, the governments want a radiating internet system so that they may easily monitor it plain and simple.
Sorry I'm on my rant again, I'm all done for now.
Mike
Dennis