[RFI] RE: No More Nice Guy? (was BPL video FAQs)

[Hare,Ed, W1RFI]

> It would not surprise me if this pattern of truth bending extended to their
> claims about lack of interference problems.

The sole claims to the lack of interference problems are that they comply with Part 15 (Part 15 = S9 noise on HF, under typical circumstances) and that they have had no reports of interference.  The trial areas range from a dozen to several hundred homes, and it is not likely that untrained consumers would file complaints. The premise is not scientific.

They have claimed no reports of interference from any of the worldwide trials. I have personally forwarded to the industry copies of the European and Japanese studies, videos and recordings.

Look at the ARRL video tape and tell me what you think of their claim that there is no interference potential from BPL systems in the US field trials.

73, 
Ed Hare, W1RFI
ARRL Lab
225 Main St
Newington, CT 06111
Tel: 860-594-0318
Internet: w1rfi at arrl.org
Web: http://www.arrl.org/tis



> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michael Tope [mailto:W4EF at dellroy.com]
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 1:24 PM
> To: EDWARDS, EDDIE J; rfi at contesting.com
> Subject: Re: [RFI] RE: No More Nice Guy? (was BPL video FAQs)
> 
> 
> Many of the industry comments are filled with technical
> hubris. In some cases it involves exaggeration, in other
> cases it involves outright falsehoods. It would not surprise
> me if this pattern of truth bending extended to their
> claims about lack of interference problems.
> 
> 73 de Mike, W4EF...............................
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "EDWARDS, EDDIE J" <eedwards at oppd.com>
> To: <rfi at contesting.com>
> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:26 AM
> Subject: [RFI] RE: No More Nice Guy? (was BPL video FAQs)
> 
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cortland Richmond
> > One of the arguments made by BPL proponents is that they 
> have received
> > no
> > complaints.
> >
> > ===
> > This may've already been pointed out, but I think one proponent said
> > "their members" (i.e. UTC members) haven't reported any BPL 
> interference
> > complaints to the UPLC organization.  In "Clintonese" that means
> > utilities who are UTC members have not reported RFI 
> complaints to the
> > UPLC.  No kidding?  You would expect that, wouldn't you?  
> Why would they
> > report RFI complaints?  Even if there were one or two in 
> the tiny areas
> > where tests were being conducted, it would be detrimental 
> for them to
> > report such complaints now that they have so much invested in the
> > outcome.
> >
> > 73,
> >  de ed -K0iL
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > RFI mailing list
> > RFI at contesting.com
> > http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
> >
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> RFI mailing list
> RFI at contesting.com
> http://lists.contesting.com/mailman/listinfo/rfi
>