It's just become a dark day in radio in America, with results that
might affect the whole world.  Possibly even the safety of people
all over the world.

http://www.computerworld.com/governmenttopics/government/policy/story/0,108
01,
90212,00.html?nas=PM-90212

FCC moves ahead with power-line broadband rules
 
It's seeking ways the technology can co-exist with other devices using radio
frequency 

Story by Grant Gross

FEBRUARY 13, 2004 ( IDG NEWS SERVICE ) - The U.S. Federal Communications
Commission will look into ways that an emerging broadband option -- broadband
over power lines -- can coexist with other devices using radio frequency. 
The FCC yesterday voted to move ahead with a process to measure interference
caused by broadband over power-line service. Broadband over power lines --
often called BPL -- delivers high-speed Internet access using near ubiquitous
power lines. But some licensed users of radio frequency spectrum have
complained that BPL interferes with their signals. 

The FCC notice of proposed rule making will attempt to measure radio frequency
emissions from BPL equipment. Several groups, including the American Radio
Relay League (ARRL) and the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA), have
expressed concerns over the unlicensed BPL equipment interfering with their
licensed radio signals. However, Ahn Wride, a senior engineer at the FCC's
Office of Engineering Technology, said FCC staffers are confident the
interference problems can be resolved. 

In December, FEMA sent a letter to the FCC outlining its concerns about
interference. But in January, FEMA Undersecretary Michael Brown sent a second
letter to the FCC saying the agency believes some rules for BPL could solve
the problem. 

Commissioners touted BPL as a potential competitor to Digital Subscriber Line
and cable modem service. With power lines nearly everywhere, BPL could provide
broadband access to places not served by cable or DSL, FCC Chairman Michael
Powell said. "It really has the potential of being the great broadband hope
for most of rural America," he said. 

ARRL representatives said they were disappointed with the FCC's decision to
move forward with BPL rules. BPL isn't likely to become a choice for residents
of rural areas because of the cost of deploying it, said ARRL President Jim
Haynie. "I had hoped the FCC would have shown a greater depth of understanding
of the issue," he said in a statement. 

The ARRL argued that the FCC rules will place the burden of proof on licensed
users of the radio spectrum experiencing interference from BPL. But
commissioners downplayed interference complaints while voting to move forward
with BPL rules. "While we must be mindful of harmful interference, we cannot
let unsupported claims stand in the way of such an innovation as BPL systems,"
said Commissioner Jonathan Adelstein. "We need to push the boundaries to
accommodate new technologies." 

The notice adopted by the FCC: 
- Proposes that BPL devices use technologies that lessen the possibility of
interference. 

- Proposes developing a public database of BPL deployments that would include
location and frequencies of BPL devices. 

- Seeks comment on radio frequency measurement guidelines for BPL devices.

BPL vendors such as Amperion Inc. and Current Technologies LLC have begun
offering BPL service in limited areas. Representatives from both companies
were unavailable for comment yesterday. 

17 responses total.

To quote a comment I saw on USENET when Britain decided to test this
concept:

"Someday aliens will wonder why we constructed a giant phased array
across the north of England in order to beam credit card numbers and
pictures of naked women into the F layer."

heh...  I like that quote.

Both Boeing and the IEEE have commented rather negatively on the BPL 
NPRM:

Boeing: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?
native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=65\16183088

IEEE: http://gullfoss2.fcc.gov/prod/ecfs/retrieve.cgi?
native_or_pdf=pdf&id_document=65\16183235

As everyone should comment negatively on this.  I still can't help but
wonder about the mental status of whoever thought this was a good idea.

It sounds like a good idea if you're unfamiliar with weak-signal radio
communications.

(To amplify a bit more...to people who aren't familiar with shortwave
broadcasting or transoceanic aircraft operations, it's easy to fall into
the assumption that long-haul shortwave radio communication has been
obsolete for years now, replaced by satellites, and the only people
still using it are amateur radio operators ragchewing on 80 meters.)

The military is still a regular user of HF, even though it's not used
as their primary message distribution medium anymore.

Perhaps more important are the aeronautical users, i.e. the airlines.

What HF bands do they use for what purposes?

The commentary by Boeing a few responses up talks about it.  They use a
narrow (~2 MHz, if I remember right) band for air traffic control
communications with transoceanic flights.

The main uses of HF in the miltiary seems to be the same as civilian
aviation; long-haul communications for aircraft that are over an ocean.

Granted in the civilian sector, it's purely for air traffic control.
While the military uses it for that and voice communications on an
operational level.

I would expect that it would also be used similarly by marine services.

This response has been erased.

Actually, most maritime comms happen via satty now.  Except for the
small fishing fleets.  But there are still a lot of smaller operations
and countries that use it as a primary.

MARS just ain't what it used to be.  Very few ships carry a station
anymore.

All this stuff of leaving HF behind will come to bite people in the ass
sometime in the future.

This response has been erased.

BPL update: There's now a trial going on in Grand Ledge, near Lansing. I
haven't heard much about the status of the trial,though.

Anyone been getting QRM from this?

Response not possible - You must register and login before posting.

- Backtalk version 1.3.30 - Copyright 1996-2006, Jan Wolter and Steve Weiss