Slashdot Mirror


FEMA Opposes Broadband Over Powerlines

Curmudgeon Rick writes "According to eHam.net, the Federal Emergency Management Agency has put a submission to the FCC strongly opposing the use of powerlines for broadband distribution. The report can be found here [PDF link]. IMO, vendors should let powerline broadband die. They keep defibrillating it only because of the dollars they poured in; but it is and always was a dead duck." The submission concludes: "FEMA has concluded that introduction of unwanted interference from the implementation of BPL technology into the high frequency radio spectrum will result in significant detriment to the operation of FEMA [emergency] radio systems such as FNARS."

92 of 346 comments (clear)

  1. Commerical by rf0 · · Score: 3, Informative

    Well there are commerical ventures in the UK which are selling broadband over powerlines

    news report

    Rus

    1. Re:Commerical by Ion+Berkley · · Score: 2, Informative

      The difference in the UK I believe is that the actual bandwidth is being carried on fibreoptic that is strung on the same towers rather than down the actual transmission lines. So they are capitalizing on the real-estate value of the point-to-point corridors that the network of transmission towers creates. Frankly that makes a lot of sense to me. I don;t know the numbers for the UK, but the US has I suspect far more 'dark' (unusde) fibre already in the ground and hence there is probably less demand for long-haul datapipes, the problem being the classic of last mile distribution instead.

    2. Re:Commerical by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful
      All powerline broadband systems in operation inside the UK are in offical terms classified as trials, even if the operator markets it as a commercial service. The only body to license such systems for widescale commercial deployment in the UK is the Radiocommunications Agency who so far have failed to grant any company a commercial license, due to the issue of interferance.

      At least every couple of years someone will come along claiming to have a low/no interferance system and manage to secure a trial license from the RA only to find after the trial finishes that a full commercial license won't be granted.

  2. Too bad though... by HMA2000 · · Score: 4, Interesting

    It was a strange and most likely unworkable technology but I was looking forward to having a 3rd industry in the broadband game.

    1. Re:Too bad though... by monkeydo · · Score: 2, Informative

      Just about all of them. AT&T's offering

      --
      Si vis pacem, para bellum
      The only thing more annoying than a Libertarian is an (un|mis)informed Libertarian
    2. Re:Too bad though... by TheRealFixer · · Score: 3, Interesting

      There are, in fact, companies selling line-of-sight RF broadband access. The small town I used to live in a couple years ago had a company doing this. They provided you the antenna (kind of an odd steel grill, shaped like a small satellite dish) The speeds were not that impressive (we were getting around 40-55 KB/sec), and the signal is blocked by landscape. But for some areas where there was no DSL or cable capability or infastructure, it was an affordable solution for quick and easy broadband.

    3. Re:Too bad though... by BagOBones · · Score: 2, Informative

      2 way 11Mbit/s over Microwave
      Air Surfer

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    4. Re:Too bad though... by ngoy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sprint used to be one out here in AZ. It was Speedchoice, now Sprint Broadband Direct. They still support older customers but are no longer taking on new ones due to the lack of an "optimum cost structure." It is a line of site service, so there is a diamond shaped antenna which points at an array on a mountain. Rain fade hasn't been a problem, trees growing are. Since it is a microwave system they have an fcc license or something for each installation. But the cost is only $44.95/month, six email accounts with web sites through earthlink, slow upstream speed though (Easynews using Newsbin Pro at an average of 4.5Mbps. Online gaming is ok once the command rates are tweaked a bit. And I don't have to deal with the cable company, the local phone company (Qwest, which sucks donkey balls), or an expensive two-way satellite. Too bad they are not installing customers, they skip the whole last mile link since the line of sight range is over 50 miles iirc.

      --
      --ngoy
    5. Re:Too bad though... by ngoy · · Score: 2, Informative

      And that link for sprint was typed wrong, it is SprintBroadband, not springbroadband. Sorry.

      --
      --ngoy
  3. I wondered if this was going to be a problem... by Svartalf · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Afterall, the HAM operators have been saying that the test markets for the current set of BPL services were generating RF trash that could interfere with various longwave services since they resided in the same spectrum. Since this is all Subpart 15 stuff, they're probably going to get told to lower the emissions to practically nothing or don't do it.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:I wondered if this was going to be a problem... by connorbd · · Score: 2, Informative

      Except they actually want Part 15 changed so they don't have to do anything.

  4. Oh well.. by irokitt · · Score: 2, Insightful

    This is sad, because there are still multitudes without regional access to DSL or cable. Satellite is expensive and still uses dial-up for upstream comm. And some of those who are still using dial-up have to deal with poor line quality and congestion. Power lines exist everywhere, and have the ability to bring high-speed access to a lot of people.

    --
    If my answers frighten you, stop asking scary questions.
    1. Re:Oh well.. by jhunsake · · Score: 4, Informative

      Satellite is expensive and still uses dial-up for upstream comm.

      Yeah, five years ago it did. All satellite services now offer bidirectional satellite.

    2. Re:Oh well.. by DrEldarion · · Score: 4, Interesting

      Moral of the story: If you want a fast internet connection, don't live in the middle of nowhere.

      Joking aside, a lot of the time it just isn't practical to get broadband out to people in certain areas. Besides sattelite (which is far from perfect, lots of latency and slow upload), it's really not worth it for these companies to put the infrastructure in place to serve the few amount of people that would use it.

      If they could make extremely-long-range wireless, though... I'd love to be able to just run around anywhere and have a constant high-speed monthly-charge connection to my laptop. Mmm....

    3. Re:Oh well.. by strictnein · · Score: 4, Informative

      Satellite is expensive and still uses dial-up for upstream comm

      Not true, they have two-way satellite connections. The up-stream is generally in the 64kbit range (so, about twice that of an average phone connection (which for the upstream ~32k))

    4. Re:Oh well.. by WolfWithoutAClause · · Score: 2, Informative
      The big problem with 'satellite' is that this currently means geosynchronous satellite. That is about 38000km away, which at the speed of light means a round trip ping time of 38000*4 (out to the satellite and back, twice).

      That's a about 0.5 seconds on top of what you would normally get with DSL (minimum ping time with DSL is about 20-40 ms).

      The bandwidth is fine; but 0.5 seconds is easily enough to be irritating. Still, if you've got nothing else, you'll survive, unless you're trying to play Quake III.

      --

      -WolfWithoutAClause

      "Gravity is only a theory, not a fact!"
    5. Re:Oh well.. by fatboy · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This is sad, because there are still multitudes without regional access to DSL or cable. Satellite is expensive and still uses dial-up for upstream comm. And some of those who are still using dial-up have to deal with poor line quality and congestion. Power lines exist everywhere, and have the ability to bring high-speed access to a lot of people.

      Well, you have to ask yourself, would it be OK to pollute the rivers in your town so that people can have cheap and affordable DSL? Imagine no one being able to use those water ways because they were too polluted.

      The HF part of the RF spectrum is a valuable natural resource, just like rivers and streams. It is unique because signals bounce off the ionosphere to land hundreds or thousands of miles away, without any infrastructure other than the Earth's magnetic field and solar winds. It is used for long range Marine and Aircraft navigation, Military comms, Broadcasts and Amateur communications.

      It would be a shame to completely ruin this natural resource to line the pockets of the power companies.

      If you knew my politics, you would know that last statement is not someting that pops out of mouth without some real thought. (I like capitolism, a lot)

      --
      --fatboy
  5. Well, I'm bummed by IamGarageGuy+2 · · Score: 2, Funny

    Without looking into this too deeply, I believed that this was a great idea that only needed the proper amount of time to develop. Once again, it looks like I'm wrong. **** Look of astonishment on faces of all readers ****

    --
    Stay tuned for new sig...
    1. Re:Well, I'm bummed by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I am one of those who live in the country. No cable, No DSL, Satelite does not allow VPN access.

      I am screwed.

      I was hoping service by power lines might be useful, but I guess some idiots can't think that far. As mentioned before, what about the rural, backwoods people? Satelite does have upload and download by satelite, but VPN access is not possible.

    2. Re:Well, I'm bummed by trentblase · · Score: 2, Informative

      You can do VPN over satellite... a quick google search would show that.

    3. Re:Well, I'm bummed by joggle · · Score: 2, Insightful
      As it currently is, volunteer hams provide emergency communication and coordination during emergencies (such as on 9/11 when they helped coordinate hospitals because the cell network was jammed).

      If, on a normal basis, hams can't use their equipment due to interference from powerline broadband, they'll give up their hobby and you'll loose that extra layer of defense on the next emergency.

      There's also the issue of interference with other users of this frequency spectrum, such as flight controllers for GA (as mentioned in the article). Like other frequency ranges, HF is very valuable and there had better be a damn good reason to screw it up and frankly VPN in rural areas doesn't cut it.

      There are at least two other technologies that could let you have VPN when DSL and cable isn't available: WiFi and fixed, radio towers that I believe are in the microwave range (at least here in Boulder, although they cost nearly as much as satellite).

  6. interference. by junkymailbox · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I would have thought that the power lines themselves would generate much more interference than the data lines.

  7. Simple Solution to Interference with FEMA's radios by gristlebud · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Pull the plug

    I mean, seriously. If there's all kinds of natural/unnatural disasters happening, let the Feds disconnect access until the crisis is stabilized.

    Some people may complain about freedom of the press or censorship, or some other fool thing, but when a crisis is unfolding I'm much more interested in getting information from the radio, shortwave, or scanner than I am about reading /.

    --
    OK...
    I can do this. I am, after all,
    a superhero!
  8. of course by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Why use powerlines when you can use pigeons?

  9. Interference? by ActionPlant · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I really am curious. I can see the logic behind opposing interference, but I was of the impression that broadband would be transmitted at a very different frequency. If they do the math right, the waves really shouldn't interfere with each other.

    But I'm not as informed as I'd like to be. If they DON'T use powerlines (that's a lot of wasted money) what are our other options?

    Damon,

    --
    http://actionPlant.com
    1. Re:Interference? by BagOBones · · Score: 4, Informative

      Microwave
      Here in Canada our population is spread out even more than than the US.
      We also seem to have the most high-speed internet options.
      There are Microwave based ISPs here that offer 2 way communication at 10Mbits /s making it faster than the ADSL and Cable options. These ISPs tend to service the outskirts of the cites. The service costs a little more than ADSL or Cable.

      --
      EA David Gardner -"... but the consumers have proven that actually what they want is fun."
    2. Re:Interference? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      The problem is called frequency harmonics. For example, if you are broadcasting at 10,000MHz, there will be harmonics at 5000MHz, 2500MHz, 1250MHz, and so forth (cutting the frequency in half each time).

      The amount of energy on each harmonic is about half of the previous harmonic. From the previous example, if you have 50W at 10,000MHz, you probably have 25W at 5000MHz, 12.5W at 2500MHz, and 6.25W at 1250MHz.

      What certainly doesn't help matters is that power lines are electromagnetically unshielded, essentially making them giant antannas(sp?) for broadcasting. Needless to say, this causes tremendous interference.

    3. Re:Interference? by buck_wild · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The power company I work for is running fiber through gas lines, using a fiber jacket that is non-corrosive.

      Granted, this will likely not help the guy out in the middle of nowhere anytime soon.

      --
      If all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail.
  10. Still stuttering along in the UK... by rklrkl · · Score: 3, Informative
    In the UK, broadband-over-powerlines hasn't quite been abandoned yet - see the effort being trialled by Scottish Hydro-Electric. 30 quid a month for 1Mbit/s symmetric is a fairly competitive price compared to UK cable/ADSL prices, but one wonders if they have indeed solved all the interference issues.

    BTW, despite the pages looking like it's a done deal, they've only trialled it in two towns to date and have no availability checker on their Web site, so I'm not expecting this to be rolled out to a wider UK audience for quite some time yet.

    Oh, and the very obvious reason why this seeming dead duck is still being touted around is that rural UK users have neither cable nor ADSL. With satellite Internet being ludicrously expensive, this powerlines gubbins [if it works properly] might be the only way that those in the "country" can get broadband at a sensible price...

  11. The Energy Monopoly by mjt+AG · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Its good that FEMA advises against BPL (especially in a technical explanation). If the energy companies get their hands in broadband service . . . uh oh, we may see one of the biggest monopolies in energy.

  12. The day they take my powerline broadband by jlowery · · Score: 4, Funny

    will be the day they pull the power cable from my hot frying dead hands.

    --
    If you post it, they will read.
  13. But this is FEMA by cyril3 · · Score: 2, Funny
    the secret government of the USA. So what is the 'real' reason they oppose this. And what is the hidden link with the internation space-borne mind control laser system that even now seeks out independent thought and snuffs it out like

    ohh look at the pretty daisys. mummy where are you, i cant see you any more.

    mummy ... sniff

  14. Re:Emergency = Power outage? by LastAndroid · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Thats a good point.

    However if you can only use your ham radio when the power is out, then why own one?
    People won't want to own them if they can't use them. Then when the power goes out almost no one will have them.

  15. Depends... by Svartalf · · Score: 5, Informative

    Transmission conditions would be fine- but then you're talking about a transmitter with a lot of power compared to the BPL system. The transmitter might even jam the BPL system if it were working.

    What they're worried about is reception. Over long distances, while the signals are detectable, they're really pretty weak comparatively speaking. The stuff that the BPL systems are generating are in the ballpark of the signal levels that might be detectable, so the signals from the BPL will be most likely the ones you detect.

    So, you might be in a FEMA office, say like in Denton, Texas, where the power is on- but the emergency is in Corpus Christi or Brownsville. Power's out THERE because of a disaster- but the locally running BPL system's causing merry hob with your reception of the signal from that location.

    --
    I am not merely a "consumer" or a "taxpayer". I am a Citizen of the State of Texas
    1. Re:Depends... by TWX · · Score: 3, Insightful

      And all that's in the short term anyway. They're having a harder and harder time getting people to get into HAM Radio. The last major influx was during the Vietnam War if I am remembering what I've heard correctly. If it's not even really feasible to enjoy the activity due to interference, there'll be less and less reason for people to become HAM radio operators, and eventually there'll be some major emergency with cell towers nonfunctional, powerlines down, phone lines down, and no one to coordinate things over the air.

      --
      Do not look into laser with remaining eye.
    2. Re:Depends... by ChuckleBug · · Score: 2, Informative

      reason for people to become HAM radio

      AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!

      HAM IS NOT AN ACRONYM! It's just "ham." Why do people insist on calling Amateur Radio HAM radio, and Macintosh computers MACs? Tighten it up, people!

      I'm sorry. I tried to contain my peeve, but I kept seeing it over and over and I snapped. (/me sobs into a pillow)

    3. Re:Depends... by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 4, Informative

      Keep in mind also that hams routinely make contacts with less than 1 watt of power output. I don't know how much raidation a BPL system would throw out, but the Amateur's Antenna Rule is that the higher the antenna and the more wire you put into it, the better it is. A BPL system would be a fairly high antenna and possibly miles long. The ionosphere would propagate BPL noise as well as it would propagate any other ham radio signal of comparable power output and antenna characteristics.

      It's quite usual, for instance, to have the net control for a hurricane network far away from the path of the hurricane. (In fact it's a pretty good idea for obvious reasons.) A ham in Corpus Christi in the middle of a hurricane might be able to get a signal just fine, assuming the atmospheric noise would let him and his antenna stays up, but net control in Florida might not be able to hear him -- or anyone else on the net -- due to the BPL interference.

      The ARRL (national amateur radio organization) is very opposed to BPL, because it would most likely cause severe interference to radio hams. See the ARRL's BPL web page for the hams' version of the story.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    4. Re:Depends... by fshalor · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Ham Radio Operators really fear the use of power lines for broadband. Tests in Europe have shown that this kills most of the communcations in the high frequency range currently employed in the Amateur Radio hobby.

      I'll add that Hams have a vital role in most emergency situations. Not too long ago I got to listen to a traffic pass from a Ham in Mexico. He was providing the Hurricane Center with to the minute live information on storm conditions right up to the point where his roof came off.

      Boradband over powerlines threatens to interfear with this sort of communication.

      Thanks to FEMA for the reccomendation. I hope it playes towards keeping Ham Radio alive. (Umong other things.)

      --
      -=fshalor ::this post not spellchecked. move along::
    5. Re:Depends... by deck · · Score: 3, Interesting

      The power levels of current BPL demonstration projects are so high in the local area that they over ride all but the most powerful signals. This has been confirmed by actual reception tests. Often all that can be heard are the 10 KW (thousand watt) shortwave stations; and they are noisy even then. The companies that are wanting to deploy BPL want even higher power levels than are currently allowed by FCC Part 15 regulations.

      Another problem is that high frequency radio transmission as low as 100 watts can wipe out the BPL signals.

      These two cannot survive together. Wideband digital transmissions have other mediums that they can use: optical fiber, coaxial cable, shielded twisted pairs, twisted pairs, microwave frequecies. There is only ONE high frequency radio environment.

      BPL is just a non-starter.

      "Someone skilled in the art"!

    6. Re:Depends... by Our+Man+In+Redmond · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I agree with you about QRP -- I keep thinking I'm going to find time to get a QRP rig put together one of these days, although the block there is the antenna (the lower your power, the more efficient your antenna needs to be). I also want to try PSK31, which from what I understand is usable at QRP levels and below.

      As for SWL, though, that's a tough one. Many countries have found that they just don't have the resources to broadcast to a United States which is in general indifferent to their international services' existence and have moved over to systems like Realaudio. That's not to say that this couldn't turn into a listening disaster in Europe, where shortwave is still very much in use, or in places like rural Africa or South America where stations could be made unlistenable by a BPL version of a DDoS attack.

      The US needs to keep in mind that, even though we're big, we're not the only country out there, and there are some decisions we make that have repercussions in the rest of the world.

      --
      Someone you trust is one of us.
    7. Re:Depends... by Lumpy · · Score: 2, Interesting

      I don't know how much raidation a BPL system would throw out, but the Amateur's Antenna Rule is that the higher the antenna and the more wire you put into it, the better it is.

      Not 100% true.

      The best antenna is the one on top of a mountian with high gain and 3 inches of coax between it and the transmitter.

      MOST of your signal is lost in the coax run from the transmitter to the antenna unless you use extremely expensive coax cable. I recently bought some for $12.00 a foot and it was a steal at that price! (heliax hardline 2" 52 ohm with Connectors.) to gain only 5 DB on transmit AND recieve that I was losing with flexible high end coax.

      when you are dealing with signals that are a microvolt you certianly don't want some government approved interference being transmitted by the world's largest antenna array (electrical grid).

      Plus ignore emergency communications... Moonbounce communications would become useless... Transmit at the moon with 1500 watts into a 20 DB gain antenna Array and only get a little signal barely audible above the noise floor back. or amateur radio astronomy? (yes it is easy with a throw away 20 foot dish in your back yard.)

      If the power lines were shielded I wouldn;'t have a problem, but the FCC screams bloody murder at the Cable TV companies if they have even the slightest leak, why does everyone even think that this gigantic interference maker would ever see the light of day?

      --
      Do not look at laser with remaining good eye.
  16. FNARS? by Spudley · · Score: 2, Funny

    Fnars?

    Oh dear. Viz magazine has infected Slashdot! :-o

    (uh... appologies if you didn't get the joke - it's only going to be understood by the Brits...)

    --
    (Spudley Strikes Again!)
  17. National Security card.... by utlemming · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Looks like FEMA played the National Security Card. With all the things that have been said about BPL, this, I think is one of the most impressive reasons not to have BPL. But it does raise the question, in the event of an emergency which would require the use of the those frequencies, would the lines even be up? Then again, I can see that if it interfers with the Civil Air Patrol, it would be reason enough.

    --
    The views expressed are mine own and do not express the views of my employer.
    1. Re:National Security card.... by connorbd · · Score: 2, Insightful

      You realize not everything is based on conflicts of interest, right? There are legitimate technical reasons for opposing BPL. Making emergency communications satellite dependent is not a good idea. /KB1KKC

  18. Lets hope someone takes a wise decision by borjam · · Score: 5, Insightful

    HF radio is *the* communication medium for many life-critical situations. It is the only affordable communication line for many NGOs operating in third world countries, and HF equipment is much easier to setup and more rubust than satellite equipment.

    Until now, the HF spectrum has been carefully regulated to avoid harmful interference. It is just not acceptable to sacrifice it simply to get a cheaper Internet access. There are a good set of broadband technologies available which almost do not interfere with HF users.

    Let's hope politicians wait to notice it until a true emergency happens...

    1. Re:Lets hope someone takes a wise decision by mpost4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The interfernce is at the reciving end, so lets say there is a problem in the 3rd world, but the reciver is in a place that has BPL, the place with the BPL will not get the weak signal, even though the transmiter does not have BPL.

    2. Re:Lets hope someone takes a wise decision by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 2, Informative

      Last month I was in Clovis Califorina and I could her BPL on my Mobile HF set up in the early evening at 3975. The band was long. BPL propigates just like all RF signail in the HF bands. There is no BPL in Clovis/Fresno Ca. It was skip. It was 20 over S9. BPL is a threat to all HF communications. It should be banned world wide.

      --
      If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
      Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
    3. Re:Lets hope someone takes a wise decision by dciman · · Score: 2, Informative

      Agreed, as a HAM radio operator I am very aware of the problems caused up BPL. It would basically kill any HF work, if it were to become widespread. Things are bad enough the way they are now.

      It would really suck ass if the next time I was out hiking or in a remote area and some emergency happened, and I needed to get out on HF that no one would be able to pick it up because of BPL.

  19. FEMA by frovingslosh · · Score: 3, Funny

    I'm a ham and have been very concerned about the reports of spectrum polution from Broadband over Powerlines. But if FEMA doesn't like it, maybe it's not so bad after all.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  20. Come on! by El · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I have a rural property that's too far from the switching office to get DSL, and they're not even thinking about running cable (but if they did, I'd have to pay ~$10,000 to run the cable from the property line to the house.) They're doing everything they can to discourage ISDN use (e.g. charging a $200 connection fee), and even POTS dial-up won't connect at better than 28.8. My viable choices for broadband are wireless or power line (I even have my own transformer). I wish they would hurry up and support one or the other. All the wireless broadband trials seemed to have concluded they couldn't make any money and have been discontinued. What are we supposed to do, all move to the city if we want decent internet access?

    --

    "Freedom means freedom for everybody" -- Dick Cheney

    1. Re:Come on! by RzUpAnmsCwrds · · Score: 2, Informative

      Satellite.

      Yeah, latency is lame, but the speed is good.

      Alternately, find a friend who can get broadband and set up a WIFI link.

    2. Re:Come on! by terras · · Score: 2, Interesting

      There is always paying to get a full T1 to your residence. It won't be cheap by any measure, but you could turn around and resell WiFi to your neighbors.

  21. Good call. How about optical instead? by bigberk · · Score: 3, Interesting

    The RF spectrum is already heavily polluted, it would be nice to keep data transmissions off powerlines (each powerline acts as a huge antenna).

    Seems to me that you can still use the powerline infrastructure a bit for providing Internet connectivity. Why not run your fiberoptics alongside the power t-lines?

    Up here (Canadian north) there are some power utilities that are installing optical data lines on top of power lines anyway for the purpose of remote sensing & monitoring. Maybe a power utility could install extra fiberoptics while they're at it, use a small percent of the bandwidth for monitoring and sell the rest of the bandwidth to telecom for providing internet service?

    1. Re:Good call. How about optical instead? by ediron2 · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I sat thru a presentation on this by the local power company a couple years ago in the DotCom heydey. 'Why not add a fiber-optic cable' got complicated fast:

      1 - vendors come in, offer to pay for the infrastructure in return for exclusive rights to it. If you refuse, they ignore your town indefinitely (AT+T did this here when they owned the local cable company). Anyone approaching these vendors about subleasing access gets quoted insane prices ($20k per month to use an existing cellphone tower for an 802.11b antenna, in one case I know of).

      2 - There are restrictions on putting cables onto poles. These range from weight and rain/wind/snow load design issues to vertical/horizontal clearance restrictions. Imagine being responsible to safely/quickly work on one of 25 cables (including data, fiber, and *power!*) on a single power pole and you start to see a worst case scenario.

      3 - Each new cable needs full engineering, documentation, and 24x7 support staff.

      4 - Buried lines are not cost-effective to piggy-back, so areas without poles are inaccessible.

      5 - These aren't communications/IT gurus that are being asked to make these infrastructure decisions. They're politicians, planning and zoning staff, and a few Electrical Engineers (Power, not computer/communications). The learning curve to doing a good infrastructure with a 25-year expected life is nasty enough without this handicap.

      6 - The existing owners hate complications. Power company doesn't want the liability/hassle, or phone company doesn't want the competition.

      7 - The cost of cabling, repeaters, etc: let's say roughly 100 lattice lines per square mile x the area of your city. I dunno where to even look it up but I'll estimate cable cost installed at a buck per foot. And I'll throw in ten grand per square mile to handle the electronics. That's some serious cash, and I wouldn't be surprised to learn costs were much higher.

      So, it isn't that the ideas aren't out there. There are even some *more* clever devices (little fiber-retrofit robots 'stapling' the fiber to the top of sewer pipe). But it's not cheap, it's not easy, and once those two concepts (hard and expensive) join forces, it becomes risky politically. Much riskier than doing nothing.

      Of course, a lot of communities just nodded gratefully when presented with option one (where the town agrees to perpetual rape-n-pillage unregulated monopolies by a single vendor). Ow! Thank god for the multiple-headed threats of: powerline broadband, dsl, cable modems, wifi, cellphone wireless, and beyond, because that keeps just enough competition in my area to hopefully nudge cost-per-gig down. Hell, I left the above meeting intensely angry about the learning of the city's agreement to one such infrastructure monopoly, since there are hundreds of local IT geeks that would have volunteered to design things to eliminate/minimize a monopoly like this.

      Disclaimer: These are all 2-year-old impressions of things a bit outside my area of specific experience. Actual details may vary widely, no warranty given. But the above was enough of an eye-opener for me to give me a greater respect and fear of the last mile problem.

  22. Restrict the frequencies or use notches by G4from128k · · Score: 3, Interesting

    It seems that FEMA only uses a limited set of frequencies. Why not install notch filters at select access points and design the broadband to only use the remaining bandwidth (either in frequency space or via notch-resistant error correction protocols in the physical layer). The same could be done for ham radio users -- bandpass filtering outside the traditional X-meter bands used by SW radio operators.

    Broadband use of powerlines does not have to create a broadband noise source.

    --
    Two wrongs don't make a right, but three lefts do.
  23. some "solution" by The+Lynxpro · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Aside from the service issues in rural communities and the express desire for more competition in the broadband market, why would anyone want broadband via power lines? Its not like we have reliable power in the United States when you factor in all the surges and spikes our household electrical equipment experience on a daily basis. Do the powerline "modems"/adapters have built in surge suppression? Are they made of metal? Because if not, if a major surge goes through your house, the adapter would melt the plastic and set fire to your house. After all, that is how Reggie Jackson lost his classic car collection. And if power lines lose 33% of the electricity that is transmitted, what does that translate to in terms of data loss? Perhaps if the power companies wish to increase their profits, they'd invest in better cabling so more efficient power transmission would occur.

    --
    "Right now, somewhere in this world, Scott Baio is plowing a woman he doesn't love," - Peter Griffin, *Family Guy*
  24. it's all about the wavelength by solarcardork · · Score: 4, Informative

    Considering (US numbers) it takes about 776 miles of power line to make an efficient 1/4 wave 60Hz antenna and just 2.5 feet for 100MHz, it is fairly clear that adding high frequency content to the power lines can easily cause significant radiation.

  25. FNARS = FEMA NAtional Radio System by Jim+McCoy · · Score: 2, Informative

    Google is your friend...

  26. Re:This doesn't make sense by LWATCDR · · Score: 2, Informative

    No not really but then I know something about radio.
    wireless broadband uses 2.4 or 5 Ghz. That is up in the microwave range. It will not interfere with the HF stuff the FEMA cares about.

    --
    See my blog http://ilovecookes.blogspot.com/ for light hearted technical information.
  27. Re:Emergency = Power outage? by frovingslosh · · Score: 5, Informative
    When a disaster hits and power and communication are out, hams are not just trying to talk to other hams in the local area (which they generally do on higher VHF and UHF bands anyway), they are trying to reach points that still have power. So if their signal is is jammed by crap radiating from the power lines, then vital communication can be lost.

    Besides, how arogant can you be to think that hams should have their equipment sitting around useless because of lots of broadband over powerlines spectrum polution, not even be able to pratice using it or train new hams, and then expect that there will be no problem when there is a power and communication emergency just because the local broadband interference is now temporarly eliminated?

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  28. Re:FEMA is an unconstitutional entity by TedCheshireAcad · · Score: 4, Funny

    Broadband over power cables interferes with FEMA's mind control satellite.

    You're now entering aluminum foil hat territory.

  29. Re:Power Line Networking by jared_hanson · · Score: 2, Interesting

    There is a difference between the HomePlug home powerline LAN solutions for running in your house and running broadband from the power company to all homes connected to its lines to form a WAN.

    --
    -- Fighting mediocrity one bad post at a time.
  30. FEMA Opposes it or Someone Telling FEMA to Oppose by Bruha · · Score: 3, Interesting

    IMO the telco's and cable providers are probably more worried about this than anyone and they've probably filled FEMA up with all kinds of bull about what it might do to fema's spectrum.

    Of course the FCC should test anything and give it a license which means it cant interfere with anyone elses equipment and FEMA's equipment is supposed to accept any interference. Either way this story is moot and FEMA needs to get their own experts that are not paid by the opposition to formulate their own studies and opinions on the matter.

  31. Re:Simple Solution to Interference with FEMA's rad by mpost4 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    How do the people in one location know when to pull the plug? Also you have the local people mad when they loss their net access because of an emergncy, that they belive has no effect on them.

    I could think about what people in a city in the US might say if they had their net access cut so that FEMA can take a call comming in from South America, the best solution is not to have people use something that would have to be pulled so that some one can recive a SOS.

  32. When was the emergency brodcast last used ? by rhino_badlands · · Score: 2, Troll

    Ok i live in upstate NY and two of the most recent events that would be needed for the emergency brodcast system (9/11, and the Black out this past summer) didn't use it !

    Not once was it used durring either event ! so basicaly they should have no say, its an outdated system that is never used anymore.

    Furthermore if there is such an emergency they could trip the broadband so it turns off so it won't disrupt their signal ...

    In anycase horid decision making done by idiotitic buerocrats, to even make a statement like they are.

    If this was a valid argument the FCC would be involved.

    --
    - MOSKIE
    1. Re:When was the emergency brodcast last used ? by tx_kanuck · · Score: 3, Informative

      How do you know it wasn't used? IIRC, it was used in 9/11 as a means of communication for people. HAM during emergencies is not designed for everyone to use to make a phone call. Instead, it is used for emergency personell to communicate where they normally wouldn't be able to. For example, if the phones are out between HQ and a staging area, then HAM would step in and provide communications between the two. Plus, if you consider the amount of radio traffic that would have been going on at a single point in time, if there was need for an emergency communication, HAM could be used instead of waiting for the average cop to get off the radio. Basically, bandwidth is added when necessary.

      There are also many HAMs in Texas, and all over tornado alley, that are used for weather spotting. These guys are driving where there are no cell phone towers (or the towers have been damaged), and need to communicate back to the weather center. This is a system that is used every year by many people, and many lives are saved b/c of the work they do.

      Re. your comment about turning off the broadband.... When do you think they will practice their skills? The radio operators have to practice calmly so that where there is an emergency, they can still operate. There are a lot of shorthand codes that they have to know so that they can give lots of information in a short amount of time. If they can't practice, how will they know what frequency to use? Who is going to be in charge? How do they organize themselves?

      Basically, you're full of shit, and shouldn't talk. Just b/c there is stuff going on behind the scenes that you don't know about doesnt' mean that you can spout off. Do your research first.

      --
      Now, if that makes sense to anyone, could you please explain it to me? I think I've confused myself.
    2. Re:When was the emergency brodcast last used ? by Goody · · Score: 2, Informative

      Ok i live in upstate NY and two of the most recent events that would be needed for the emergency brodcast system (9/11, and the Black out this past summer) didn't use it ! Not once was it used durring either event ! so basicaly they should have no say, its an outdated system that is never used anymore. Furthermore if there is such an emergency they could trip the broadband so it turns off so it won't disrupt their signal ... In anycase horid decision making done by idiotitic buerocrats, to even make a statement like they are. If this was a valid argument the FCC would be involved.

      How do you get a couple hundred independent utilities to shut off their BPL systems in an emergency ? Is residential Internet really so important as we need to wreck infrastructure independent radio communications ? And what about being about to train to use the radio equipment during non-emergency times ?

      The EAS doesn't even use HF frequencies and it was established by the FCC. It's a silly statement to dismiss FEMA because you haven't heard EAS broadcasts. And then you say the FCC would be involved ?? They released a friggin Notice of Inquiry months ago. Also, the NTIA which trumps the FCC in spectrum regulatory matters has taken notice and now they're doing a study.

      --
      Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
    3. Re:When was the emergency brodcast last used ? by Y-Crate · · Score: 2, Insightful

      This honestly surprises me.

      On 9/11, the Emergency Alert System as it is now called should have been used to communicate instructions to those in the attacked areas. It could even been argued that a National Security Warning should have been issued to alert those in critical areas nationwide. During the blackout, a Civil Emergency warning should have been sent out as soon as information about what it was and was not became availible. Instead, people huddled understandably afraid in the dark wondering what was coming next and what could be happening around them.

  33. Re:Emergency = Power outage? by Goody · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Wasn't the original and best argument about this the fact that, *in most cases* when HAMS were in use for emergency communication, the power was already out?

    Amateurs need to maintain equipment and practice needed skills before a disaster occurs. If the equipment is unusable during regular times, what is the motivation even to buy equipment? Another thing to consider is that emergency stations need to be able to communicate out to areas that do have power.

    Another issue to contend with is the propagation characteristics of the HF radio band which BPL is using. Interference could travel thousands of miles. I doubt anyone will want to track down interference a thousand miles away when a hurricane has just flattened their state.

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  34. I was offered this by deadline · · Score: 2, Interesting
    Recently my neighborhood was offered this service (PPL) I had just signed up for a cable modem as we are too far out for DSL. I am not sure if anyone bought it though. I found it odd that they were charging for this since it was a "trial" and people were pretty sceptical.

    Of couse this is Pennsylvania, where we are all supposed to have already.

    --
    HPC for Primates. Read Cluster Monkey
  35. Re:Power Line Networking by N1XIM · · Score: 2, Informative

    It isn't about the WAN--it is about the size of the antenna. Think about it. Miles and miles of powerlines already make great antennas for all sorts of things that we wish they didn't pick up (WAER in Syracuse, NY, for instance--the transmitter is downtown in the university area). One can only imagine the havoc that having wide bandwidth signals spewing from such a large antenna would cause if it were done at high enough power levels to be useful. Hell, internet over plain cable TV lines does bad things to RF freespace spectrum that isn't allocated to the cable system as primary--due to poor installations. You think that the power distribution grid is any better? Ha! You can hear a 60Hz hum on many frequencies in many places in US due to leakage on the power lines. Imagine adding internet width spectra to that!

    So, the question is not LAN/WAN--it is antenna size!

  36. Re:This doesn't make sense by Carnildo · · Score: 2, Interesting

    So when your farmhouse gets hit by a tornado, you don't mind that there will be no way of contacting the outside world? That the ham radio operator trying to raise the emergency coordination center is having his signal squashed by the BPL system?

    --
    "They redundantly repeated themselves over and over again incessantly without end ad infinitum" -- ibid.
  37. BPL FAQ by Goody · · Score: 4, Informative

    Here or if that gets Slashdotted, here

    --
    Tired of being "punished" by the Slashdot $rtbl since 2002. I'm now over at http://soylentnews.org/ .
  38. Re:Perhaps someone can explain to me by pla · · Score: 3, Informative

    why doesn't putting a signal over a power line act like a big antenna?

    It does. Thus we have a ubiquitous 60hz hum that every interference-sensitive hunk o' wires within 20 miles of a power line needs to waste time/space/energy to filtering that frequency out. An if the hunk 'o wires in question actually has the express purpose of looking in the 60hz range, good luck - It might take less effort to fly to Siberia than to filter out line noise yet allow a desired near-60hz target signal to pass.

    (For those in the UK, change "60" to "50")

  39. No. by Valdrax · · Score: 3, Insightful

    The best counter-argument to that is that there would be no ham radio operators if they couldn't use their equipment except for when the power's out. I mean, would you invest large amounts of time and money into getting equipment and certification for a hobby that you couldn't ever practice? Guess what -- no one else would either.

    --
    If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
  40. Re:FEMA Opposes it or Someone Telling FEMA to Oppo by Sleeper · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't think so. IMHO, in case BPL would get accepted they'd just step aside and watch this thing to die and then they would take over the BPL customers.

    Iterference would be a huge problem fo HAM operators and everybody who use HF/VHF. But the thing is interference goes both ways. So I think if deployed in wide area BPL would just really really suck. You power line infrastructure was just not built to be protected from interference. Any kind of it. Even people with DSL have problem with intereference. And that's CAT3 UTP (in most places).

    So for telco and cable providers BPL will just awake an apetite of more people for broadband. If you ever had broadband (however bad it was) going back to dial-up is just painfull. Most of my firends who installed and had problems with DSL just switched to cable. I don't even remember anyone of them fireing up their dial-up modem ever again.

    As far as I remember for a long time ARRL was the only voice oposing to BPL.

    --
    - Back off man. I am a scientist
  41. Alternative Idea? by notcreative · · Score: 4, Insightful
    What are we supposed to do, all move to the city if we want decent internet access?

    The economics of rural service are very interesting. Right now everyone with a phone in the USA is paying to subsidize phone access to rural residents. It costs more money to service an area with a low populations density than an urban area. Fine, people need phones for safety reasons. Rural residents presumably subsidize services they don't need, like meth clinics.

    It bothers me when people start talking about subsidizing rural internet access, though. El says that "they're not even thinking about running cable" near his house, and that he'd have to shell out 10K$ to connect to said cable, anyway. I'm curious: who does he think should bear these costs? Everyone in the US?

    If people want to move to the middle of nowhere to get away from gangs, traffic, comedians, literacy, and culture, that's fine. It isn't reasonable to expect the same service level in the middle of nowhere that one enjoys in New York City, though. It's especially unreasonable to regard the acquisition of these services as a right. If you want to enjoy cheap services, then move to where it is cheap to provide those services. If you want to live in an area that is difficult and expensive to service, break out your wallet.

    El isn't necessarily making this argument, he just reminded me of the people I had to deal with when I worked in the rural NW.

    1. Re:Alternative Idea? by Kris_J · · Score: 2, Insightful
      who does he think should bear these costs? Everyone in the US?
      Uh, Yeah! If the whole of America was one big city where do you think your food would come from? There are single farms in Australia that are larger than most European countries, but because they're run by a family of five they suffer from one-person, one-vote. Now, I'm a city-slicker and always have been, but I don't mind in the least bit if part of what I pay for infrastructure is used to subsidise the rural areas. I think $10,000 bills just to have a couple of wires run a few kms to your house are a little unreasonable.
  42. Doesn't matter... by OneFix+at+Work · · Score: 2, Interesting

    The most likely evolution of broadband is cellular broadband being implimented on a wide scale once the majority of the UHF spectrum goes back to the FCC (currently sometime in 2007...I think)...

    The cellular companies will get a huge chunk of the old UHF spectrum, and most likely they will start going into the broadband ISP business. It only makes sense.

    As mobile technology becomes the norm (more and more ppl are using laptops) they will demand wireless connectivity. This has the 2-fold benefit of bringing affordable broadband to rural areas (99% of rural areas have cellular coverage...your little handheld phone might not get a signal, but a stationary antenna would)...as well as always-connect broadband for mobile computing...

    There's a new group of consumers that are just around the corner...these are the young kids (just getting into Jr. High right now) that have grown up with the internet and have never known a world without a computer with a global network connection. They are a lot like "geeks/nerds" in the way that they CRAVE information...they want to be connected 24/7 and they want it now!!! This isn't something that's going away and as soon as these kids start getting paychecks they're going to be driving the technology industry into new directions...

  43. Re:This doesn't make sense by W2IRT · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Ok, let's rephrase that then: wouldn't it make more sense to simply require broadband over powerline to not emit any significant energy in the HF spectrum?

    And while we're at it, let's require that the laws of physics be re-written by Congress! You just don't understand what we're talking about. Power lines are great for low-frequency AC (60 Hz power), but inefficient for higher-frequency signals.

    The proposed Broadband over Power Lines service would be a shared user of frequencies between 2 MHz and 80 MHz. Again, these frequencies wouldn't propagate as well over power lines, so they would be sent at high power levels. Much of their energy would be lost in the transmission from the upstream connector to your home -- i.e. radiated out the miles-long antenna formed by the power line! Simply put, you CANNOT have non-interfering BPL if it uses the 2-80 MHz spectrum. Period.

    FEMA and other governmental users' radios are scattered between typically 2 and 50 MHz in different sub-bands that are used depending on the time of day, how active the ionosphere is and the overall path of intended communications. Ditto for fixed services, land-mobile, aeronautical and marine services, beacons, short wave broadcasters and amateurs.

    The problem is two fold:
    1) anybody trying to receive a signal between about 2 and 80 MHz would be unable to do so.
    2) Legally-licensed transmitters in that range would cause untold interferance to these "Part 15" devices. Part 15 means they can't legally cause interferance and must live with any interferance they get. Aunt Millie's not going to be happy when her cordless phone is rendered useless by broadband and Uncle Phil will be pissed when he can't surf porn because the clean and licensed 1000 Watt transmitter up the block is on the air.

    This has to be killed and killed NOW.

    --
    Cheers, Peter, W2IRT
  44. Dilbert by Adam_Trask · · Score: 3, Funny
    Reminded me of my favorite Dilbert strip. It goes:

    The Boss (to Wally):
    Our competitors found a way to send broadband internet traffic over the power grid.

    The Boss (to Wally):
    I want to you find a way to send data over the sewer system.

    Wally (thinking):
    I thought i was already doing it.

    ----------
    Btw, i am curious. If only the text is reproduced (like i just did), is it a violation of the copyright? What if i told this to somebody?

  45. Re:Emergency = Power outage? by frovingslosh · · Score: 2, Informative
    The power's out. What crap would be emenating from the power lines?

    OK, you're an A.C. and you're stupid; I'll type this very slowly so maybe you can follow it....

    As I said above, the HF bands are used in an emergency to reach areas that do have power. They may be used to relay information about the safety of people in the affected area, they may be used to request life saving medical supplies, or to summon other emergence service providers to the affected area and let them know what to expect and what they need to bring when they come. If the areas they are trying to contact that do have power can't receive a ham radio signal because of their own broadband over powerline signal polution, then it is a serious problem. And quite simply, there are already laws against it. Hams, other people, and other industries have to follow the regulations against such interfearing radio signals, I so no reason why the power industry should not have to also.

    --
    I'm an American. I love this country and the freedoms that we used to have.
  46. solution...invert the process by Frennzy · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Instead of hampering hams with BPL, why not encourage and support IPoHR (IP over ham radio?). I'd bet with enough tweaking, modulation schemes could provide fairly decent bandwidth to rural areas via ham, which could be wire-distibuted locally. Even better, get some folks to setup 'time share' systems.

    Let's get the hams involved, and provide incentive to 'make it work', which they already have a history of doing. I'd betcha there is more than one ham-fisted-geek out there who wants to build a ham-IP gateway.

    I recall reading something about this in the dim, dark, past...but I'm too lazy to google it.

  47. Emergency != Power outage. by Kymermosst · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Emergencies do not necessarily mean there is a power outage.

    Suppose the phones go down. This happened in an area where I was living when someone cut the sole long distance line in the region. Hospitals could not communicate, and family members could not check on the status of their loved ones. Hams like me carried the messages.

    Emergency to a ham doesn't necessarily mean disaster, it means any situation where the normal lines of communications are disrupted.

    Examples of times where Hams are used for communications even when the phone lines are up, and the power is up:

    - Coordinating evacuations (fire, etc). You coordinate the evacuation of thousands with the phone system or the internet... let me know how it goes.

    - Car accident in the middle of nowhere.

    - Search and rescue efforts. Clicking and talking on a multi-access channel works a lot better than cell phones.

    There are also communities where it is a primary method of communication. There is a place called Three Rivers here in Oregon, near Lake Billy Chinook. They do not have power, they do not have phones, matter of fact, they don't have any public utilities. There's several hundred homes, each with solar and wind power, and wells or trucked water. Some cellphone coverage is available, but not much. *Everyone* has a CB or ham radio.

    --
    "Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives" should be a convenience store, not a government agency.
  48. How did France do it? by sirReal.83. · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Huh. In France, they've got powerline broadband and I haven't heard of problems. Probably in other EU countries, as well. Is this foot-stamping on the part of FEMA? Is there really no way to work it out? Maybe not... I'm just bitter about paying $40/mo for a 2Mb/512Kb connection.

  49. What about the rest of the world? by Roddersofnz · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Understand the comments however, think that they are being pushed by the old guard, note used to be into Amatuer Radio at High School, know Valve Theory@#$%@#, but the reality is that in many places there is no network other than a power grid, the development of PLC is going to be very important for the global rollout of broadband. About 14% have telephony but about 40% have power. RF issues are being dealt with, and even in the USA with great Broadband optiosn, many regions will only have a powernetwork for potential broadband, which I see as another long haul alternative, rather than trying to lay fibre, which is not econmically viable in many areas, of low population density.

  50. Re:What about DSL? by Simple-Simmian · · Score: 2, Informative
    Because it's not a radio frequency sent along the wire.
    It's an electrical signal.A weak one too.

    --
    If you don't like what I write don't be a CS and mod it down. Refute it.
    Yea I can't spell. So what is your point?
  51. FNARs? by NeuroManson · · Score: 2, Funny

    Hmmm, from my MU* and IRC experience, that stands for "For No Apparent Reason". Sneaky!

    They could have gone for a Pinky and the Brain angle though, and just called it "NARF".

    --
    Just because you can mod me down, doesn't mean you're right. Shoes for industry!
  52. Nice acronyms by ruiner13 · · Score: 2, Funny

    IMHO, someone better EOL this BPL idea PDQ before FEMA gets PO'ed. OTOH, if this could somehow work in GNU or dare I say BSD as well as MS PCs, despite the dangers to FNARS, lets give it a try. Sure beats DSL to speed those TCP/IP connections.

    --

    today is spelling optional day.

  53. The head of FNARS is a ham by Animats · · Score: 3, Insightful
    The head of FNARS, a FEMA employee, is Paul Reid, N4EKW.

    FEMA has a point, though. They've put in a nationwide HF network for emergencies that can stay up even if other communication systems go down. So if somebody does bring down the phone system, they have backup. Someday we might really need that.

  54. Re:Emergency = Power outage? by w9wi · · Score: 2, Insightful

    One might add, this doesn't apply only to hams.

    Imagine that FEMA is unable to test their equipment or run practice/training drills when there's no emergency.

    What are the chances there will be undiagnosed equipment problems? Operators who aren't familiar with the gear? Operators who aren't familiar with proper operating procedure? (locations where they can't hear anything because there's some other interference source that had been buried under the BPL noise?)

    Alternatively, do you want to have a broadband provider that stops working for a few hours a week so FEMA can run drills? (then add in the Army, the FAA, the Navy, CIA,...)

  55. Re:This doesn't make sense by W2IRT · · Score: 3, Informative

    And not just cordless phones either. Baby monitors and other non-licensed equipment at 49 MHz will be toast. Certainly HF radio will get clobbered by BPL, but VHF-Lo will become unusable, as you'll see below.

    BPL is touted as the saviour for rural residents away from cable and DSL service, right? Hope you enjoy your nice fast broadband when your house is on fire and your kids are trapped upstairs, because guess what, bunky? *MOST RURAL FIRE DEPARTMENT RADIOS ARE VHF-Lo Band* -- between 30 and 50 MHz -- since that band has much better range than VHF-Hi, UHF and 800+ over flat country. Ditto for the volunteer rescue squad and sheriff's office in Podunk County...better start IMing them for help and directions when the burglars drop by for tea, since their squad-car radios won't pick up a blasted thing as they travel on the county roads underneath all those Porn-Packed Power Lines!

    Maybe you can forget about all this nonsense and just watch a little TV? Oh, I almost forgot. If you've got an outside antenna to receive local broadcast television, you can almost write off channels 2 - 6, which operate between 54 and 88 MHz, unless you're almost right under the transmitter. Don't worry about watching the weather warnings on Channel 3 a few towns away, your weather radio will warn you of the twister heading for community -- unless a nice second harmonic is creating a strong enough local signal in your house to blot out the 162 MHz band (81 x 2 = 162 MHz, where weather radios operate). Mightn't radiate very far, but it could pack just enough of a wallop to cause your WX radio to fail as that F5 bears down on you knobby little body.

    And better get some more homeowners' insurance if you live near a major airport cuz one of the ILS approach nav-aid beacons ("fan marker") sits smack-dab at 75 MHz. Not to mention the possibility of radio-controlled model airplanes losing contact with their control box and going awry when junior is flying them in the park near home -- they're also around 72 and 75 MHz.

    This is NOT your average FUD. This is very real, and I've heard/seen what this can do in Briarcliff Manor, a small test market north of New York City. Please wander over to http://www.ac6rm.net/mailarchive/html/elecraft-lis t/2003-08/msg00562.html to get an idea of what this is all about.

    --
    Cheers, Peter, W2IRT