Catch up on stories from the past week (and beyond) at the Slashdot story archive

 



Forgot your password?
typodupeerror
×
Wireless Networking Communications Hardware

Mixed Conclusions About Powerline Networking vs. Ham Radio 343

Barence writes "Since writing about the success he's had with powerline networking, a number of readers emailed PC Pro's Paul Ockendon to castigate him for recommending these products, such as HomePlug. They were all amateur radio enthusiasts, claiming the products affect their hobby in much the same way that urban lighting affects amateur astronomers, but rather than causing light pollution they claim powerline networking causes radio pollution in the HF band (otherwise known as shortwave). Paul's follow-up feature, 'Does powerline networking nuke radio hams?' documents his investigation into these claims, which found evidence to support both sides of an intriguing debate."
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

Mixed Conclusions About Powerline Networking vs. Ham Radio

Comments Filter:
  • Sheesh (Score:5, Insightful)

    by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @06:54PM (#29059311) Journal

    It's not a debate. Doing this turns those power lines into big antennas. You can't debate the laws of physics.

  • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @06:57PM (#29059365) Journal

    This is just about the most ignorant, one-sided article I've ever read. It amounts to "Maybe it causes, problems, but HAM guys can cause problems, and oh yeah, they're dinosaurs, so fuck 'em."

    I wonder what this worthless piece of shit will be saying when some natural disaster hits, all the lines are out, but because he and other shitheads basically wiped out the HAM community to get their pr0n, instead of dedicated volunteers firing up their diesel generators to help co-ordinate rescue and relief efforts, there ain't nobody.

  • by Bruce Perens ( 3872 ) * <bruce@perens.com> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:05PM (#29059445) Homepage Journal
    There are two different things that can be considered power-line networking. One is the kind where the powerline is used to provide internet to many homes all the way from a central location through intermediate power transformers. This, fortunately, is already obsolete, because it could not provide good enough bandwidth to pay for itself. It did interfere with many radio users, not just hams.

    The other is within-home networking like Homeplug. ARRL dealt with early interference issues and has not reported any recent ones as far as I'm aware. But the very earliest models allowed us to hear your phone call on shortwave! Fortunately, people who owned those were found and warned, for the most part.

    Bruce

  • Big Props (Score:5, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:20PM (#29059599)

    Props to the egghead who called me after Katrina with a message from my sister saying she was okay.

  • by hardburn ( 141468 ) <hardburn@wumpus-ca[ ]net ['ve.' in gap]> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:21PM (#29059629)

    Yeah, there's no better alternatives to using powerline networking. It's not like you can buy CAT6 at Home Depot, or anything.

    Unlike the buggy whip people, Ham operators have constantly come up with new stuff, like figuring out how to make shortwaves go across an ocean. Powerline networking, OTOH, is a cheap stopgap solution that's better done by laying dedicated cable or setting aside radio frequencies for the task.

  • by Kinky Bass Junk ( 880011 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:23PM (#29059647)
    As much as I hate responding to flame-bait, I just have to mention that HF is still used for many real-world purposes. Here in Australia, it is used to educate kids in the outback, as well as for public safety communications. There are many more reasons to keep using HF, I can't see it dying any time soon.
  • by mpoulton ( 689851 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:29PM (#29059715)
    "keeping the HF bands clear for low signal communication is a bit like keeping the rail tracks clear of fast express trains so that nostalgists can run steam trains over them."

    The author's analogy belies the fatal flaw in his though process: HF communications may be older and slower than the internet, but the internet is highly unreliable and fails when communications are most critical. HF always works. HF is the ONLY completely reliable means of long-distance communication that humans have. To destroy mankind's sole means of completely reliable communication in favor of a system which fails when needed most is simply foolish. This isn't about amateur radio. It's merely incidental that most HF communications these days are by hams, and that hams handle disaster comms when the networks go down. These communications could be handled by any group of people, and the result would be the same: without a reliable HF infrastructure, humans screw themselves doubly when nature screws us.
  • by Anonymous Coward on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:32PM (#29059743)
    If the power's out, isn't interference from power lines moot?
  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:36PM (#29059805) Journal
    At the moment, sure; but if interference has been the rule for long enough, most hams will presumably have given up, mothballed their stuff, died off, not taken up the hobby because "what's the point?", and so forth...

    The number of people willing to maintain ham gear and skills waiting for the day it'll be useful is, presumably, a fair bit smaller than the number willing to pursue ham day to day as a hobby.
  • by davygrvy ( 868500 ) <davygrvy@pobox.com> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:36PM (#29059811)

    Power lines were never meant to carry RF energy. When they are, they radiate. Cable TV doesn't radiate. It doesn't radiate because it uses a proper transmission medium (Coax). If the power line folks want to distribute DATA, they should string the poles with fiber optic. Better yet, we the people should string it, and sell access to the content providers.. ala municipal fiber networks. They can work folks!

  • by davygrvy ( 868500 ) <davygrvy@pobox.com> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:48PM (#29059921)

    Wake up. BPL is a crappy technology. It guarantees improper radiation because the power lines aren't shielded at the physical layer. Kill BPL now and demand what we all want: Fiber Optic.

  • by Lehk228 ( 705449 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @07:52PM (#29059959) Journal
    yes it is, because the author knows damned well that nobody will actually do this.
  • by sexconker ( 1179573 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:01PM (#29060041)

    Fuck you dipshit.
    Hammies saved the day in many cases, both helping out with relaying official emergency communications and by relaying non emergence communications ("tell my wife I'm here and I'm safe with the kids").

  • by TerribleNews ( 1195393 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:02PM (#29060047)

    And I would MUCH rather trust the organization of a relief effort to trained professionals -- like state, federal, and military emergency staff -- to a bunch of "volunteers."

    You are obviously not from New Orleans.

  • by Bruce Perens ( 3872 ) * <bruce@perens.com> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:04PM (#29060069) Homepage Journal
    The problem was that the Bush administration was sold on BPL and put pressure on FCC. Dubwa made public statements in favor of it.

    There are any number of FCC staffers who are well educated in RF. I've met some of them. The problem comes when the commissioners don't let them do their job.

  • by Zondar ( 32904 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:06PM (#29060085)

    When you're in a disaster, you're not really interested in getting help from other people who are also in the affected area, who are also without power.

    You want help from people *outside* the affected area. And if this goes forward, they won't be able to hear you. Which means there's no reason to keep the radios in the first place.

  • by speedlaw ( 878924 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:18PM (#29060177) Homepage
    Here in Westchester, NY one of our local utilites tried a system in Briarcliff Manor, NY. It totally wiped out any HF reception within 3 tenths of a mile. Your normal background static was replaced by a 30/+9 digital hash. (For you non radio folks, and wi-fi does NOT count, that means the meter is pinned and you can't hear sh#&.) A broad rollout of BPL would mean that for the vast majority of radio amateurs, model railroading would be a better idea-sell you equipment to the illegal CB ops. The systems cannot coexist. I'd be very afraid of BPL when the sunspot numbers are high, as you'd then get interference from BPL somewhere in the world-making all of HF useless. While HF is not where your magik cell phone or Blackberry live, and it is not currently in style, does not mean that it is the toxic waste dump of the RF spectrum. Wi-Max, if the intere$ted partie$ involved could ever get their act together, would be a much better idea. BPL also wipes out CB, which is meaningless unless you are a trucker...or use anything trucks deliver.
  • by Achromatic1978 ( 916097 ) <robert@@@chromablue...net> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:24PM (#29060211)
    As someone who is an EMT - agreed. "Real" HAMs, fine. But if I had a device that could be triggered to zap any "whacker" over his radio, the airwaves would be a much quieter, better, place.
  • by Burning1 ( 204959 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:26PM (#29060227) Homepage

    I grew up in a town called Boulder Creek. Our fire department was staffed entirely by volunteers, and I would trust them with my life.

    I generally prefer that the people providing my health and emergency services do it because they are genuinely passionate about it. I believe passion produces better results than a sense of obligation.

  • by Achromatic1978 ( 916097 ) <robert@@@chromablue...net> on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:27PM (#29060241)
    You don't even know what is being talked about. "Homeplug" style LAN around your home via powerline. Unequivocally NOT Broadband over Power Line, internet access.
  • by PinkyGigglebrain ( 730753 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:30PM (#29060273)
    Heres another scenario for you:

    Massive Earthquake hits Southern California. All communication, power, water infrastructure destroyed or damaged.

    As you point out all the interference caused by the power lines would be gone, in that area.

    What about the areas outside the zone that are the ones the people in the zone will be trying to talk to?

    Every year a bunch of Ham radio people set up in a park in Berkeley, CA, and for three days they are off the grid running their equipment on solar panels, batteries, gas generator, exercise bikes with generators, whatever. The point is for them to show that they can maintain contact with the rest of the world without the infrastructure that will be knocked out in a disaster. And teach people about Ham radio to drum up new recruits.

    After the tsunami in Indian ocean one of the only sources of news and communication was Ham operators in the area.

    We need to keep those frequencies clear.
  • by speedlaw ( 878924 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:32PM (#29060291) Homepage
    Funny, for those of us who are old, ham radio was the entry point into technology. Are you aware that there was a world before computers ? Indeed, my first real job had a realtime voice recognition system which could convert to text with few errors. You went to lunch and an hour later, when you returned (no calls during lunch..no cell phones) your letter was typed and ready for signature. We called it a secretary who could take shorthand. In this era, technology was made up of discrete components, instead of "all in one chips". Some of us wondered what those components did. We learned that they all had a job and you could easily figure it out. Better yet, people often tossed items full of these components away. We called those "dead TV's" and they were full of FREE components, which re-jiggered, would allow you to talk to Europe with a wire in the backyard. Back when the per minute cost of an international phone call was more than the hourly wage, this was big stuff. OK, today hams use four or five digital modes on HF, using little power and less bandwidth. Ham radios are smaller than a deck of cards. A 12 volt power source and small HF rig will fit in a small tool box, and can work the world on a 135 foot bit of wire. As much as I love technology, I was there on 9-11 and the entire cell net in lower manhattan just crashed. Period. The internet is tissue paper-and the current web of communications is not very hard or resilient. The old guy cranking 1500 watts in the basement with tubes is an old stereotype, and except for a few guys "keeping the AM flame alive" on 3885 mhz, gone. The knowledge you obtain hamming does translate to computers-take it apart, try to make it work, modify it. I wonder if the TFA author can discuss frequency hopping spread spectrum digital communicators....er, cell phones.
  • by yabos ( 719499 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @08:36PM (#29060337)
    Do you really think they'll throw away all their equipment? If you had a ham radio lying around you haven't used for 10 years and the machines take over, I'm sure you'll dust it off.
  • by UnrealisticWhample ( 972663 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @09:03PM (#29060565)

    1. Guy writes an article about a product.
    2. Guy gets feedback, some of it far less than civil, stating that he was being irresponsible in his product recommendations.
    3. Guy, rather than dismissing the issue as no doubt many would, actually does some research and writes a follow up.

    I hardly think that this qualifies as "just about the most ignorant, one-sided article" on this topic, at least among those that you've read. This guy isn't a government agency or an academic group tasked with doing research into public safety concerns so it isn't his job to launch a comprehensive study into the issue.

    I get that there seem to be some credible concerns, but you aren't going to win anyone over by making hyperbolic claims about anyone that fails to agree with you. Posting "ignorant, one-sided" insult laden posts on Slashdot isn't exactly helping your cause.

  • by fuzzyfuzzyfungus ( 1223518 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @09:04PM (#29060577) Journal
    I don't suspect that the most serious hams who have already taken up the hobby will(unless they move, and don't have the space, or the SO starts leaning on them), even if only for nostalgia's sake; but I strongly suspect that, if all you can do is listen to static and wait for emergencies, you aren't going to see much in the way of new blood, and the blood you have isn't going to last forever. And, yeah, I suspect that some of the more casual players are going to say "fuck it" and ebay their gear. Not all, certainly; but numbers count if you want a communications network to work under adverse conditions.
  • by tchuladdiass ( 174342 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @09:18PM (#29060673) Homepage

    Say you are in New Orleans, and a big storm knocks out your power. You want to get a message to your mom in Chicago that you are OK (so she doesn't worry and have a stroke or something). So your friendly neighborhood Ham will fire up his rig on battery or generator, relay a message to another Ham in Huntsville, who picks up a phone and calls your mom in Chicago. Only problem is if BPL is deployed in Huntsville, that message ain't getting through to the Ham operator there. Or to any other Ham who's area has deployed spectrum polluting technologies.

  • Not just Ham Radio (Score:3, Insightful)

    by Ozoner ( 1406169 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @09:40PM (#29060843)

    It is appalling to see the dishonest arguments used by the proponents of BPL.

    Sure Hams would be affected, but what about the hundreds of other essential services which cram into the H.F. bands?

    Everything from Military, to Ambulance, Fire, Police, Aircraft, Marine, etc. rely on H.F. for reliable remote communications.

    Ham Radio is an easy target ("just a bunch of nerds, who needs them?"), but whenever the spin is limited to Ham Radio, you know you are listening to a bunch of lying scumbags.

    As a professional Communications Engineer, I can tell you that we must kill BPL!

  • by MightyMartian ( 840721 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @10:15PM (#29061087) Journal

    I really don't understand this anti-Ham attitude. These guys have proven themselves time and time again to be an important asset. Katrina certainly is the most recent example, but these guys all over the place put their own money and time into this, but out of some short-term notion of profit, we're basically going to sell them up the river.

    And to the dimwits who say "When the powers out, it won't be able problem", how do you test and maintain equipment when BPL is spewing RF all over the place? It's like having a computer without a power jack, but hoping that when they put the power in, no matter how long it takes, the equipment will just magically work.

  • by morari ( 1080535 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @10:28PM (#29061165) Journal

    My point is that no matter what happens to a country, the survivors should be able to fend for themselves in an emergency. That means grouping up, and that requires communications.

    Grouping up is the very last thing you'd want to do in order to survive. People are not to be trusted, especially not in an end-time scenario.

  • by TheLink ( 130905 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @10:39PM (#29061249) Journal
    And even if the ham stuff is damaged by EMP I bet the crustier hams could fix it.
  • by zacronos ( 937891 ) on Thursday August 13, 2009 @11:04PM (#29061407)
    Exactly. Just yesterday, I was considering taking up the hobby; it's something I've thought about in the past, but never gotten around to doing. If it's looking like I won't even be able to try it out and talk to other ham operators unless/until there is a major emergency, that's certainly not going to encourage me to spend a significant amount of time, space, and money getting into the hobby (if you could even call it that under such circumstances).
  • by Zondar ( 32904 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @12:35AM (#29061997)

    As a ham myself for almost 20 years, I understand what you're saying, but all the VHF/UHF in the world isn't going to help in a regional disaster where the scope of the 'dead zone' is beyond VHF/UHF range... like Katrina, or a tsunami, or anything else that affects a large geographic region (like maybe when the Yellowstone caldera finally blows).

    At some point, you have to get help from outside the affected area - and probably the only way to contact them (outside of satellite) is going to be HF. If the people who have power CAN'T HEAR YOU DUE TO LOCAL INTERFERENCE ON THEIR END, then what have you actually accomplished? Yes, you've done some local triage. You've probably gathered a list of needed supplies and ordered your 'need' list.

    When you've done as much as you can inside the affected area, who are you going to ask for help now?

     

  • by Nethead ( 1563 ) <joe@nethead.com> on Friday August 14, 2009 @01:05AM (#29062175) Homepage Journal

    My motto is: "Ham radio: No infrastructure required."

    73 de w7com

  • by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14, 2009 @07:56AM (#29063833)

    "Wow. I mean wow what a very ignorant statement."

    I'm sure glad to hear how ineffective myself and my teammates were in running the New Orleans Airport field hospital, 10s of thousands of patients; how ineffective the Urban Search & Rescue teams were in rescuing people in New Orleans; how ineffective the Coast Guard helicopters were in plucking people from roofs; how ineffective the Army medical was in airlifting our patients from the airport to get definitive treatment. The list goes on.

    But to get back to the amateur radio - yes, very effective in emergencies, particularly with well-run ARES groups who drill regularly.

  • by Sandbags ( 964742 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @08:19AM (#29063993) Journal

    ...and when a disaster strikes, there won't be any BoPL in use at the disaster site, as there's no power, and the other disaster sites scattered around the country to handle the radio traffic can EASILY be used at locations where interference from BoPL is either minimal or non-existant, since they can have power anywhere they want to and choose their location accordingly in advance. Honestly, this is not a real sxcenario for concern preventing BoPL deployment.

    Further, HAM is not longer the only emergency long distance band... We've had ComSat for a couple of decades now, and most first reposoners, especially those doing so for planned disaster relief, have access to handheld comsat systems. They're not that expensive, and in a first response scenario, I'm sure the government can afford a few $3/minute calls... or, just give them access to the military's own communication system on seperate first response reserved chanels and call the system a gift, provided they only use it when other methods of communication are also down.

    If we're keeping HAM around for a few thousand (at most?) true hobbyists, using the excuse that it's a disaster tool, then that's a false need to support an old and dying hobby, and it's preventing rolling out commercial BoPL services to support millions of americans with a cheaper and more stable communications system, and holding back an economy worth billions of dollars for some 50+ year old tech. How stupid is that?

    So few people use HAM anymore, we could also just as easily slash the available HAM freequency swath down to a fraction of what it is assigned for, and put BoPL at the other end of the original range, accounting for harmonic frequency crossover, and simply by simplt FCC legislation completely end this debate once and for all...

    If 10 million americans can be told to buy new home anteannas and add set top boxes because we think their TV signals are better used to support cell phones and emergency chanels, why can't we tell 3,000 americans their EASILY considered obsolete kit should be replaced with some sat phones (and even given the expense of calls, it's likely still cheaper than owning an ariel, base radio, and generator...)

  • by GigsVT ( 208848 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @08:58AM (#29064339) Journal

    VHF is pretty useful in a disaster too. All it takes is one guy climbing/driving up to the top of a mountain who can do simplex relay for the entire massive area.

  • Like this (Score:1, Insightful)

    by Anonymous Coward on Friday August 14, 2009 @10:53AM (#29065675)

    Fuck you dipshit.

    Troll, flamebait, unnecessarily abusive: Call it what you will, but how I see it a post has to be much more insightful and original to get away with an opening line like that.

  • by sootman ( 158191 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @11:13AM (#29066017) Homepage Journal

    If you're trolling, you've got a lot to learn--that one was WAY too obvious.

    April, 2009: http://it.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/04/22/2043235 [slashdot.org]

    From TFA: [perens.com]

    The first lesson is what stayed up: stand-alone radio systems and not much else. Cell phones failed. Cellular towers can not, in general, connect phone calls on their own, even if both phones are near the same tower. They communicate with a central switching computer to operate, and when that system doesn't respond, they're useless. But police and fire authorities still had internal communications via two-way radio.
     
    Realizing that they'd need more two-way radio, authorities dispatched police to wake up the emergency coordinator of the regional ham radio club, and escort him to the community hospital with his equipment. Area hams dispatched ambulances and doctors, arranged for essential supplies, and relayed emergency communications out of the area to those with working telephones.

  • by azrider ( 918631 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @02:52PM (#29069201)

    Unlike the buggy whip people, Ham operators have constantly come up with new stuff, like figuring out how to make shortwaves go across an ocean.

    OR:

    • Digital transmission
    • Mobile Data Terminals
    • Trunked Radio
    • Wireless Video
    • Mobile (and Fixed) Repeaters
    • Digital Spread Spectrum - you know, WIFI

    As a ham radio operator (17 years), an ARRL Emergency Coordinator (8 years) and a liason to State and County emergency management departments for 12 years, you will be glad we're here when the rest is down

  • by Verdatum ( 1257828 ) on Friday August 14, 2009 @04:32PM (#29070573)
    Yes, infinite. The same way as it takes an infinite amount of energy to instantaneously change velocities. Radios emit on Radio Frequency (RF), but yes, hammers can transceive on the visible spectrum. It's called a signaling lamp, and has been used for over a century. More modern variants use things like lasers. Think of it like fiberoptics, only without the fiber.

The moon is made of green cheese. -- John Heywood

Working...