RSSDirecTV Considers Internet Via Power Lines
By Ed Oswald | Published May 15, 2007, 4:53 PM
DirecTV is considering offering broadband internet service via power lines next year, with the company mulling a wide-scale test in a major US city.
The satellite provider is one of several talking to power-line Internet equipment manufacturers about offering high-speed Internet services. A test to see if such a service is feasible would occur in a "top 50" city and would have a coverage area of at least half the city.
Satellite TV operators are feeling the squeeze of competitors, and have begun to investigate solutions to allow subscribers to sign up for high-speed Internet service. The ability to offer options for Internet connectivity could make satellite TV service more attractive to some.
DirecTV has also considered Wi-Max technology, and even a partnership with satellite television competitor EchoStar Communications, the parent company of the DISH Network.
Currently, the company offers DSL service through partnerships with three major telephone providers, including Verizon, Qwest, and AT&T. AT&T is a partner with EchoStar as well.
There are opponents to broadband over power lines, or BPL. The technology is said to cause a great deal of radio frequency interference, and some groups, most notably amateur radio operators, have been very vocal in their opposition to the technology.
"Overhead electrical power lines and residential wiring act as antennas that unintentionally radiate the broadband signals as radio signals throughout entire neighborhoods and along roadsides," a document from the American Radio Relay League (AARL), an organization of ham radio operators, on the subject reads.
Interference from BPL has been observed across the high frequency or "shortwave bands," as well as on VHF frequencies commonly used by first responders.
Amateur radio bands also receive such interference. The ARRL has gone as far as to attempt to have BPL deployments blocked through the FCC, claiming it violates laws that protect amateur bands from interference.
The "dirty little secret" of typical BPL systems is that because they utilize a transmission process that is legal under the FCC's Part 15 rules, they must ACCEPT any existing interference from licensed radio services. This means that you can't do anything about a Ham radio operator in your neighborhood who LEGALLY is licensed to transmit 1500 watts; and it will CLOBBER your BPL modem. Tests have shown that a Ham transmitter with as little as 4 watts -- less power than a cell phone -- could shut down your BPL internet transmission: and there is NOTHING that can be done to complain, because the Ham was *licensed* to transmit legally, and the BPL system is *unlicensed* and therefore must function in the presence of licensed signals in the SAME frequency domain. Tests of BPL systems have been carefully arranged in neighborhoods WITHOUT amateur radio operators, whose addresses are all available in a public database that anyone can access. So, go ahead: install a BPL service. But, if it just goes dead or becomes intermittent, forget about complaining: it's probably because a Ham operator has driven by, or lives in your area: and the BPL operator has no recourse whatsoever. THIS IS A FACT, not an urban legend! I am a retired broadcast engineer with 27 years in the business of maintaining large market AM and FM broadcast stations. Many problems arise in neighborhoods of local broadcast transmitters, with telephones, stereo systems, PCs, answering machines, intercoms, and TV sets not working correctly due to the strong local radiation from LICENSED stations. Hams use less power than many licensed stations; but if you are close by, you could get much more signal from a Ham set, than from a commercial broadcaster many miles away. And, there are about three-quarters of a million American Hams. So, if you can sign up for a SHORT TERM contract, go ahead: test BPL where you live. But, don't be surprised if the service is FAR less reliable than ADSL or cable Internet...sorry!
Furthermore, economic figures for the installation of long distance BPL systems for rural use are prohibitively expensive, as a multi-thousand-dollar repeater and Internet backbone node must be installed every 600 feet or so on the power line; and expensive equipment must be put in at each transformer to transmit the BPL signal. It will simply be uneconomical to run BPL across all rural lines to serve, say, a customer every few miles or even SEVERAL per mile. BPL is not a "magic" system and involves extremely complex technology, requiring virtually perfect power line maintenance, especially focusing on the cleaning of insulators (which often go dirty in rural areas, causing arcing and noise that will BLANK OUT the weak BPL signals.) Don't hold your breath if you live miles and miles from a local telephone company office, too far for ADSL: BPL will *not* be the answer for rural Internet customers for decades, and -- frankly -- maybe never.
SRW
Score: 0
|I wouldn't consider a home without fast internet access. It's about equivalent to getting a house without power.
Score: 0
|Good God, YES. Get that BPL going ASAP, a third of the US has no terrestrial broadband. As for the ham operators...well, I do feel for them, esp. since they pioneered a lot of wireless packet techniques. I don't think they'll have to worry, though, seeing as how emergency services use shortwave extensively. If BPL catches on, the interference problems will have be addressed.
Score: 0
|Better come up with some alternative. DirecWay/HughesNet is our only "high-speed" Internet option, and is pretty bad.
Score: 0
|I feel your pain there. I am on Wildblue satellite. $80 a month for 1.5/256.
Gotta love that satellite latency: /sarcasm off
Pinging yahoo.com [216.109.112.135] with 32 bytes of data:
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1653ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1151ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1163ms TTL=46
Reply from 216.109.112.135: bytes=32 time=1172ms TTL=46
Ping statistics for 216.109.112.135:
Packets: Sent = 4, Received = 4, Lost = 0 (0% loss),
Approximate round trip times in milli-seconds:
Minimum = 1151ms, Maximum = 1653ms, Average = 1284ms
Score: 0
|Mmm, that's a nice ping. You can actually count it.
Score: 0
|Yeah, forget online gaming. Also don't forget the lovely Fair Access Policy: You get 169 MB to download (225 MB in off-peak hours [2-5AM; only three!]); if you exceed that (no matter how quickly), you're stuck at around 5 kB/s downloads as it refills at that rate. It sucks.
Score: 0
|where are you?
Score: 0
|who
Score: 0
|Score: 0
|Just hurry it up please, and FiOS needs to start spreading out faster too. The lack of competition has left 90% of the country with outrageously slow internet for the prices were paying. Especially when compared with European countries.
Score: 0
|Well, European countries in the towns.
If you live in the countryside it's still expensive for low-speed broadband (crappy cables all over the countryside).
Score: 0
|Great! I am game for anything new :). I especially like the fact that the connection over BPL is symmetrical.
Score: 0
|