To: | tentec@contesting.com |
---|---|
Subject: | [TenTec] BPL trials |
From: | "Rob Atkinson, K5UJ" <k5uj@hotmail.com> |
Reply-to: | tentec@contesting.com |
Date: | Wed, 10 Mar 2004 15:03:09 +0000 |
List-post: | <mailto:tentec@contesting.com> |
This is not good news to me. If I were on a huge tract of land and could
easily place my antennas hundreds of feet from any power line I guess I'd be a bit relieved. However, being located in a city, I have three separate sets of lines no more than 200 feet from my lot and one cuts right across my front yard. The BPL people are going to have to do a lot better than this if they want me to go away. Rob Atkinson K5UJ <<<<There was a very comprehensive article about this in the most recent South Eastern Repeater Association's Repeater Journal magazine. Several of the SERA ham's were involved in the recent BPL testing conducted in the Raleigh, NC area. They were working with officials from both Progress Energy and the BPL equipment vendors and a couple hams who work for Progress Energy. The testing they did used both overhead and underground lines. The hams used mobile and fixed stations to monitor the BPL signals. For the overhead segments, they heard signals between 25 and 29 MHZ. The mobiles heard signals at S-9 near the lines but it fell off quickly as they drove away and was barely audible at 400 feet away from the lines. A fixed station about a mile away using an 80 meter dipole heard the 10 meter BPL about S-6. A ham 5 miles away with a big beam on a 100 foot tower heard no signal. On the underground segments, they reported signals between 10 and 15 MHZ. The signals were reported to be much weaker, and were audible only within 100 feet of the above ground pedestal. They reported on a quick transmit test to see the effects on the BPL signals. A 5 watt FM signal on 29.6 MHZ completely disrupted the BPL signal, but a 100 watt FM signal only caused a momentary blip. A 100 watt CW carrier on 40 meters had no effect on the 10 meter BPL signal. It seems the BPL equipment is very frequency agile and is able to quickly jump around anywhere in the HF spectrum as needed. The bright spot in all this is that they report the power company and BPL providers are very cooperative and seem genuinely concerned about the possibility of causing interference to ham and emergency communications and are considering ways they can avoid or eliminate interference. My hat is off to the SERA for their involvement in the testing and to editor Gary Pearce, KN4AQ for writing such an informative article. I just wish they would put some of the material on their website so other hams could enjoy it.>>>> _________________________________________________________________ Learn how to help protect your privacy and prevent fraud online at Tech Hacks & Scams. http://special.msn.com/msnbc/techsafety.armx _______________________________________________ TenTec mailing list TenTec@contesting.com http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/tentec |
<Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread> |
---|---|---|
|
Previous by Date: | [TenTec] Re:[Ten Tec) Omni6+ and Option 3, Mike Brown |
---|---|
Next by Date: | [TenTec] Omni VI+ and VI/3, Rob Atkinson, K5UJ |
Previous by Thread: | [TenTec] Re:[Ten Tec) Omni6+ and Option 3, Mike Brown |
Next by Thread: | [TenTec] Omni VI+ and VI/3, Rob Atkinson, K5UJ |
Indexes: | [Date] [Thread] [Top] [All Lists] |