Comments on: Broadband-over-power-lines battle goes to court

Appeals court hears ongoing spat pitting amateur radio operators, who fear nascent devices will cause harmful interference, against the FCC, which views BPL as future cable or DSL rival.

[NWLB]

Love HAM radio types, but....

....I'd like to not have my cable TV messed with, when the HAM nearby my home wants to chat with Bubba from New Zealand.

In the scheme of things, the HAMs need to take one for the team.

[kc8fcw]

HAM Radio types

If your cable TV is being "messed with" because your radio operator neighbor is talking to "Bubba"
in New Zeland you should get in touch with your
cable provider. It sounds like their system has
an open spot somewhere. Cable is supposed to be
a closed system. But I know thats its easier to
blame it on something that you dont understand.
Good Luck

[filcro]

BPL offers too much and HAM radio has choices

The HAM operators case is flawed in many ways. HAM operators can operate on a multitude of bands and frequencies that are far from those utilized by BPL. They state that "In the event of an emergency" that they are at times the only ones to help. Yes they have been and all they have to do is "turn the dial". If the emergency is a real one and the electric is out; their point is moot.

On the flip side the benefits of the U.S. developing this technology is beyond anything that consumers, government, science or education can imagine. It's like someone saying we should stay with tube radios because the air around radios will get cold if we use transistors.

Every part of our lives could be improved if BPL is developed the right way. Anyone who knows about HDMI 1.3a understands what BPL could bring about in the future. Imagine one day you get home and plug your new TV in and that?s it! Power and content through one simple plug. Now imagine hundreds of devices all being networked, interactive and functional by the consumer simply plugging it in!?

I'm sure that MSO operators and TELCO's are scared. They don't want competition unless they can control it.

The FCC is on target. They are promoting technology, choice, competition, jobs and the consumer. Some are scared. Imagine a consumer with choice? Anyone who has cable TV, uses a cell phone or a regular telephone knows the frustration of dealing with companies that totally control markets, communication platforms and your real freedom of choice.

I'd like to thank the FCC for looking to the future and thinking of the People of The United States vs. the monopolies that currently control the markets and special interests.

THANK YOU FCC

Tony Filson
http://www.ExecutiveSearch.TV

[ecregger]

Oh yeah....!

Many hams build their stations so that they have emergency power when the utility companies fail. This is a fact. Not to mention the fact that all most hams have to do to stay in touch with each other is to simply go to their cars and operate from the car's electrical system.

However, with the roadways become unusable for RF communications because of BPL emissions, the number of amateur radio operators putting expensive mobile radio gear in the autos will drop substantially. After all, everywhere they go, all they will hear are the BPL signals.

BPL is about using existing electric lines for data transmissions because the added cost will be minimal. It is NOT about new technology and holding back the internet.

There are NO alternate bands for ham operators to use, as was suggested by a poster. BPL will gobble up every existing ham band. There is no place to go and no place to hide.

There was a time, before the FCC was bought lock, stock and barrel by the lobbyists when one of their primary principles was "good engineering practice". This applied not only to amateur radio operators, but to other producers of RF frequency emissions. I want my FCC back!

Ed Cregger, NM2K

[rfinesmith]

Response to "BPL offers too much"

Dear Tony,

Your arguement belies a lack of understanding about ham radio capabilities, and a misunderstanding of the ARRL position in many ways. Although I suspect your mind is made up, I would still like to provide my assessment of your analysis.

First, I agree with you that in the event of widespread BPL implementation, ham radio operators will benefit from the complete elimination of power line noise, when and if the electrical power goes out. With no power on the lines, the interference from BPL will be totally gone. Almost all hams have gas powered electric generators for such an event - it is called the automobile. Until the gasoline runs out, hams will be there to help provide emergency communications for their neighboors.

You are absolutely correct that ham operators can operate on many frequencies far removed from those utilized by BPL. However, none of the frequencies outside of the those utilized by BPL have the capability for long distance communications. The frequencies utilized by BPL are the only frequencies capable of long distance terrestrial communications, and BPL spans all of those frequencies. This is the reason why it is not just ham radio operators who are concerned about BPL. (I should note that there are only a hand full of ham radio satillites, not nearly enough to satisfy the long distance communications needs of the ham radio community.)

I am not sure why you mention tube radios. I suspect you are trying to subliminally introduce a predjudice into the reader's mind that hams use old fashioned tube radios. Let me correct this impression. Tube radios have not been widely used by hams for approximately 25 years - if not longer. While some old-time-radio aficionados still enjoy tube radios, ham radios today are at manufactured with leading edge commercial technology; i.e., transistor VLSI and even incorporate software driven technology, such as digital signal processing.

To date, however, there is no technology that can effectively cancel, or even effectively reduce, the kind of interference produced by most of the BPL equipment and systems.

Regarding your plea for more competition, I agree that we need more competition in the market place. But even today, many political entities limit competition (by law), by granting these monopolies to one cable company or another. Wouldn't you agree that those laws should be removed?

With over a million hams in the USA and a greater number throughout the rest of the world, the real question is not whether we should sacrifice a few hobbyists for the promise of digital Nirvana. (As an aside, I seriously question the ability of BPL to provide the amount of bandwidth that you ask us to imagine.)

The question should be, how can BPL be implemented so as to not interfere with liscensed applications (such as ham radio). It has been proved that certain implementations of BPL can avoid significant interference.

Unfortunately, the FCC has not made the interference issue a priority, and dispite it's own laws regarding harmful interence, the FCC has doctored the scientific studies that it sponsored, and has made untenable interpretations of what constitutes harmful interference - untenable, that is, to those who have been, and are continuing to be, affected by BPL interference.

[Man In A Bucket]

Can anyone say...

EVOLUTION !

Thank you FCC.

[rfinesmith]

Huh?

Even evolution produces losers. Take my Neanderthal, please!

[spencerritchie]

re BPL

The FCC neglects to tell you that BPL also interferes with Public Service such as Police, Fire, ect. It also interferes with Broadcast Radio, and the lower TV channels. The ARRL isn't the only one that come out against BPL. The Association of American Broadcasters has, along with other public service groups. The FCC also doesn't tell you that other countries in Europe and Asia have discontinued BPL because of interference, to other services. So it is NOT only the hams that are complaining. As far as Hams interfering with cable. Cable systems are supposed to be closed systems, as per FCC rules. So if Joe Ham is intefering with cable tv, there is a leak somewhere in the cable sytem, so take it up with the cable company.

[HamRadioGuy]

Already a Dinosaur

We've been hearing about this technology for over a decade, yet it has failed to flourish, even with relaxed regulation. Any internet technology that relies predominantly on copper wire is doomed. Fiber and wireless are the future. Nonetheless, there are ways to deliver BPL that are less likely to bother existing spectrum users. Why should the law allow companies to pollute radio spectrum, when they clearly don't have to?

[kumar v raman]

already a Dinosaur

I am totally not agreeing with Ham Radio Guy describing BPL as Dinosaur. To create the boundary less world and to move entire Mankind into next level we have to spread the Broadband to every Human being living on the Earth. I feel BPL is only solution to the present dead-lock in terms of Broadband distribution with available technologies of DSL and Cable. Both requires huge Capex and time to spread every corner of the Globe. Considering the level of Power line penetration and available infrastructure BPL is most vaible technology to take Broadband to masses in rapid time with least cost.

At the same time we should't pollute with Radio spectrum. We have to come out with a via media solution by using combination of both FTTC and BPL technologies. In this mathod Digital signalls will be carried upto the LV distribution level instead of introduceing the Digital signals at HV level through FTTC.

[videowares]

the ultimate solution - WIMAX. Data belongs in the air - not on a wire

Get real folks. You'll have to pry my ham radio equipment out of my cold dead hands before I let BPL interfere with my operation. Ham radio = 100 years and counting. BPL = Flawed technology for geeks that will dump it for the next thing in speed in 5 years.

And who wants your computer data port plugged into your 110? DSL and Cable, WIMAX takes care of my needs! Want a fast, secure connection. Try fiber to the home. Beats BPL six ways to Sunday!