Major BPL Company to Shut Down

In the latest of a string of commercial Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) failures, International Broadband Electric Communications, Inc. (IBEC) is dropping its rural Internet service this month.

In a 12/23/11 letter over the signature of Scott E. Lee, the CEO, IBEC states:

It is with a very heavy heart, that we must inform you that IBEC will no longer be in a position to provide Internet service to your area.

We encourage all of you to pursue other options for your internet services as soon as possible. This includes your email service if you have an active @BPL,COOP email account. Please move to another email service as soon as possible.

...

Our demise, started with the April 27th storms of this year in Alabama, which destroyed over 3.2 Million in assets, which our Insurance Provider (CHUB) has refused to pay. We also lost a critical investment from an Investor commitment, due to these storms, putting IBEC into a negative financial situation. IBEC pursued assistance from RUS (our Federal Creditor at US Department of Agriculture), our vendors and endless potential buyers after these events without success.

It is doubtful that radio fans will be as heavy-hearted.  One might remember IBEC for another reason.  ARRL:

More than a year ago, the ARRL filed a complaint with the FCC, documenting ongoing harmful interference and egregious rules violations by IBEC-installed BPL systems in Virginia, Pennsylvania and Indiana. The ARRL had requested that the FCC “initiate immediately an enforcement proceeding regarding these BPL systems, and cause them to cease operation until such time as they are each in full compliance with the Commission’s Rules.” The ARRL even discovered IBEC BPL systems in operation that are not listed in the online BPL database -- another clear violation of the FCC rules, which require listing 30 days prior to initiation of service. To the ARRL’s knowledge, even as of today, the FCC has taken no enforcement action to correct these violations.

ARRL also notes that IBEC was the last BPL provider in the US that didn't notch amateur bands (a violation of FCC regulations).

UK Ofcom Caught Lying on BPL/PLT (No April Fool)

Ofcom, the UK "FCC," has been caught in a lie, or at least a strong political spin, regarding the legality of a popular device used widely in that country for in-home Broadband over Power Lines/ Power Line Telecomm (BPL/PLT).

On the record, Ofcom has long maintained the position that the equipment operates within the law as it exists in that country. However, a legal request for documents has recently turned up a test result commissioned by Ofcom, which was apparently suppressed when it came back showing the units well in excess of electromagnetic compatibility standards.

At present, it strongly appears that a major UK regulatory agency developed a policy for political rather than engineering reasons, and then spent years intentionally covering up data in conflict with this policy. There, as here, the word for this is corruption.

Here's the first part of a story in The Register UK:

Ofcom forced to publish tests on dodgy radio kit
FOI request prompts action
By Bill Ray
Posted in Wireless, 31st March 2011 12:07 GMT

Ofcom has been forced to disclose its own tests showing that powerline networking kit does breach the European EMC Directive, but still won't do anything to enforce compliance.

Despite claiming there was no evidence that PLT kit built by Comtrend and supplied by BT was breaching EU rules on electromagnetic emissions, the regulator has now been forced by a Freedom of Information request to publish independent research, commissioned by them, which shows exactly that.

The request was pursued by Peter Walker, a radio amateur who eventually had to take Ofcom to an ICO Tribunal to get the regulator to hand over the study - which appears to contradict Ofcom's line in stating that the equipment tested, which was supplied by Ofcom, does not comply with the standards required by EU legislation.

...

ARRL Shows IBEC BPL Systems Are Interfering, Violating FCC Rules

[Hugh's note: IBEC stands for International Broadband Electric Communications, Inc. Contrary to what you have been told about Broadband over Power Lines (BPL), it remains commercially viable in "underserved" rural markets where DSL and cable are not practical options. IBEC's equipment is fully certified under current FCC rules, and the company offers turnkey solutions ready for immediate deployment by any power company. Everything was supposed to be fine, but according to the ARRL, there is some trouble in paradise. Read on.]

12/29/2010

ARRL, the national association for Amateur Radio has filed a complaint with the Federal Communications Commission documenting ongoing harmful interference and egregious rules violations by Broadband over Power Lines (BPL) systems installed by IBEC, Inc. in Virginia, Pennsylvania, and Indiana. The ARRL has requested that the FCC “initiate immediately an enforcement proceeding regarding these BPL systems, and cause them to cease operation until such time as they are each in full compliance with the Commission’s Rules.”

Contrary to earlier representations to the ARRL and to statements in the online BPL database, IBEC’s systems in these locations are not universally notching the Amateur bands as is necessary in order to avoid emissions at levels that are likely to cause harmful interference to licensed Amateur Radio stations. In fact, measurements by ARRL staff and confirmed independently show that IBEC systems are not even notching the aeronautical bands that the FCC rules require BPL systems to avoid and are operating at power levels that cause radiation well in excess of the FCC limits.

The ARRL even discovered IBEC BPL systems in operation that are not listed in the online BPL database – another clear violation of the FCC rules, which require listing 30 days prior to initiation of service.

...

full story here

Power Line Communications on agenda at ITU

From Southgate Amateur Radio Club, UK:

Power Line Communications on agenda at ITU

ITU Working Parties 1A and 1B will meet in Geneva between June 21 and 28. A major item of discussion will be protection of radio services from interference from Power Line Communications (PLC) also known as PLT or BPL.

IARU has already contributed to the ITU-R report SM2158 “ Impact of power line telecommunication systems on radiocommunication systems operating in the LF, MF, HF and VHF bands below 80 MHz“ where the acceptable criteria for degradation of the HF radio noise floor caused by PLT is defined as being 0.5dB. Work in WP1A will concentrate on the protection of radio services from the effects of PLT in range from 80 to 200MHz.

The IARU delegate to SG1 and its working parties is Peter Chadwick G3RZP: three input contributions have been prepared for this meeting. One of these is a report on the effects of intermodulation in power supplies causing the amateur band frequency notches in the PLT spectrum to be degraded: this report has been prepared from the work by Richard Marshall, G3SBA published in the RSGB RadCom magazine, and also points out the difficulty such effects could have on the PLT system itself.

A further input establishes the protection criteria for amateur stations operating in the 2 metre band: Ian White, GM3SEK contributed to this input, and it is considered that the amateur and amateur satellite services require protection such that PLT interference does not exceed -45dB m V/m in the main lobe of the antenna, with a separation between antenna and the PLT installation being at least 10 metres.

The third input is of a more general character showing that there are a number of non-amateur services that could suffer interference from PLT or its harmonics, such applications including social alarms for the elderly, pagers, medical implant telemetry, as well as broadcast, and when aggregation of radiation is concerned, aircraft navigation and communications. When the differences in range between PLT and mains leads and the social alarms and medical implant ‘base’ stations etc., are taken into account, the acceptable levels of radiation to protect the amateur services are of the same order as those needed to protect these other services.

In another posting to this club's excellent web site, VK3PC notes that "Access BPL" is for all purposes extinct in Australia. He says that it never really reached a critical mass in the market down there, and it is rapidly being abandoned for other systems.

Thankfully, a similar process seems to be at work in the USA, with the infamous Manassas system being the latest victim.

"Access BPL" differs from PLC aka PLT aka In-Home BPL in that it uses the power company's wires, which have been demonstrated to be excellent (if inadvertent) transmitting antennas. Less is known about the real-world, non-laboratory-conditions RF emission from PLC/ PLT/ In-Home BPL. This completely different system uses the house wiring to distribute high-bandwidth applications such as video on demand. Originally, wi-fi was not up to this task, though the technology is evolving rapidly.

While a bad situation has existed for some years in the UK, compounded by regulatory abdication, the problems there may or may not ever actually happen in the United States. US house wiring differs considerably from the 200-volt loops with fused plugs that are still fairly common in the UK.

New PLT Product Brings HF Doom A Step Closer

Let's forget the tech speak, and the engineering talk of decibels and signal levels.

Here's what is happening, in plain English:

What we are facing is the design and high-powered marketing of a whole large family of new products which cannot operate normally without ENDING SHORT WAVE RADIO, FOREVER.

Period.

It's no more technical, or esoteric than that. NO MORE SHORT WAVE. EVER. The entire HF band, 2 to 29 megahertz, JAMMED by the most highly distributed system of wideband HF noise generators EVER INVENTED. If WE do not act proactively, NOW, these will be in every building in the industrialized world.

Is that simple enough?

The latest such invention being heavily marketed, amid glowing praise in magazines, sends audio through power lines using HF carriers at a high enough power to jam the entire spectrum in a radius of hundreds or thousands of feet depending on conditions.

This particular product was tested by someone on the UKQRM list and was found to have NO NOTCHES! Amateur radio frequencies are NOT PROTECTED! This matches the experience in Portugal, where products are distributed without these notches.

Got that? No more utility. No more ham. No more use of marine USB while dockside. NO MORE SHORT WAVE RADIO, ANYWHERE IN THE INDUSTRIALIZED WORLD, EVER AGAIN.

I don't know why I bother with this cause. The apathy is complete, and the regulatory indifference is shocking. Unless a movement starts, right now, involving people who traditionally distrust political movements, it will be over. The regulatory agencies will say, well, that's the breaks. Sorry about that.

The people of this Earth will lose the most accessible and democratic (small d) communication medium ever invented. This will have a tragic effect on all history.

Now... is that clear enough?

Use of BPL Declines in US

ARRL:

According to the FCC figures, the category "Power Line and Other" dropped from 5420 lines in June 2007 to just 5274 six months later [out of 121.2 million Internet connections -Hugh]. It is not known how many of these are "Power Line" and how many are "Other."

"Despite the enormous and unwarranted hype given to BPL by the FCC under Chairmen Powell and Martin, the message from the marketplace is clear: BPL is going nowhere as a means of delivering broadband connectivity to consumers," observed ARRL Chief Executive Officer David Sumner, K1ZZ. "Still, the FCC has unfinished business with respect to BPL. It has been nine months since the federal Court of Appeals ordered the Commission to correct the errors it committed in adopting rules that inadequately protect licensed radio services from BPL interference, yet the FCC has made no effort to comply.

BPL (Broadband Over Power Lines) refers to the use of HF frequencies for broadband transmission of Internet packets over power company lines. The system has not been successful in the US market for a number of reasons, but the FCC for political reasons continues to push its use. IBM recently announced that it will work with power companies to implement BPL in rural areas beyond the reach of DSL and cable.

BPL is not the same as the home powerline networking system that is causing such a severe problem in Europe and South America. The use of these latter devices, more typically known as PLC (Power Line Communications) or PLT (Power Line Telecommunication), continues to increase rapidly.

PLT Buzz Reaches Geek Sites

Thanks to the efforts of the UKQRM group, the disastrous effect of powerline communication devices on HF radio is becoming publicized where it matters. This is in the computer professional press, which reaches the people who make the purchase decisions.

An informative story, which is about as technically correct as writing about the radio hobby ever gets, appears on The Register site:

'Interfering' BT Vision attracts campaigner glares
Ham radio enthusiasts call up trading standards

By Bill Ray
Posted in Telecoms, 15th January 2009 11:33 GMT

Campaigners complaining about interference generated by BT's Vision product have financed independent tests to show that the kit BT is pushing fails to conform to the appropriate EU standards, prompting a complaint to trading standards officers.

Shortwave radio users have been complaining for a while about interference generated by networking over mains wiring, with BT taking the majority of the flak, but until now the protestors have been complaining to Ofcom on the basis of illegal broadcasting. By demonstrating that retailers are selling kit that fails to meet EU standards the protestors could prevent its sale, not to mention the possibility of fines for those manufacturing or importing the kit.

...

This was also excerpted on ISPReview, another UK IT site.

Both embed this latest YouTube video, ominously (and accurately) entitled, Power Line Signalling: The Death of H.F. Radio.

Other links:

UK citizens' petition to save shortwave
UK interference report database
UKQRM web site

Also check out the UKQRM video page for a comprehensive look at what is going on in the UK (and starting to happen in the USA!).


---------

Added 1/25/08

The discussions on geek sites have led to hostile comments to the effect that short wave radio is obsolete, and should be abolished anyway. Apparently, we have done a poor job of informing the public of the consequences of eliminating the only long-distance communications system that does not depend on wires and/or links controlled and maintained by third parties.

Some people have even made remarks to the effect that they will stop using their PLC adapters when their cold dead hands are pried from them.

It would appear that we have something of a fight on our hands.

Bring 'em on.

US Congress Investigates "Dysfunctional" FCC

We were right all along. Or at least that's the conclusion of a Congressional investigating committee, which confirms serious malfeasance at the US Federal Communications Commission.

Their new majority report paints a picture of an opaque FCC, with a culture of fear and a tendency to suppress data conflicting with politically motivated decisions. Gee, this sounds quite a bit like many other parts of the Bush administration, does it not?

Here are some relevant parts of a news report posted to the ARRL web site:

On Tuesday, December 9, the House Committee on Energy and Commerce -- the congressional committee that oversees the Federal Communications Commission -- released its majority staff report "on the bipartisan investigation of the FCC's regulatory processes and management practices." The report -- Deception and Distrust: The Federal Communications Commission under Chairman Kevin J. Martin -- stated that the investigation was prompted "by allegations to the effect that [FCC] Chairman Kevin J. Martin has abused FCC procedures by manipulating or suppressing reports, data and information."

...

Representative John D. Dingell (D-MI), Chairman of the Committee on Energy and Commerce echoed Stupak's concerns: "Any of these findings, individually, are cause for concern. Together, the findings suggest that, in recent years, the FCC has operated in a dysfunctional manner and Commission business has suffered as a result. It is my hope that the new FCC Chairman will find this report instructive and that it will prove useful in helping the Commission avoid making the same mistakes."

But the best parts concern the FCC's deliberate ignoring of data that conflicted with its allegedly prejudiced decision on Broadband over Power Lines (BPL):

Concerning BPL, the report alleges that FCC officials "ignored complaints of radio frequency interference caused by BPL high-speed Internet technology, delayed an enforcement investigation for two years and improperly withheld engineering data regarding BPL from the public."

The report found that in October 2004, as then-Chairman Michael Powell issued his final rule "defining BPL access and setting technical and administrative requirements to protect licensed radio operators from harmful interference," the FCC "withheld from the public certain engineering reports on which it relied in promulgating the rule" from the final rule and order.

Even though the BPL rules were adopted during Powell's tenure, the report found that "it was under Chairman Martin that the Enforcement Bureau and the General Counsel continued to withhold the redacted engineering reports and insisted on doing so in the course of the ensuing litigation [with the ARRL]."

Farther down, Martin is accused of lying to Congress:

The report also showed instances of where Chairman Martin "manipulated, withheld or suppressed data, reports and information," and said Martin's "manipulation [of another report] may have damaged the credibility of the Commission, and certainly undermined the integrity of the staff. Moreover, it was done with the purpose of affecting the congressional decision-making, in that it was issued as a report to Congress."

It is certainly everyone's hope that a new broom in Washington can sweep away some of these wannabe communication lobbyists who have so damaged the FCC.

Full story is at ARRL.org.

Echostar (DISH Network) Specifies HomePlug PLT Adapters

We may have the first major deployment of power line based Ethernet in the US. Echostar, which most people know as DISH Network, is now recommending that users install PLT adapters in their homes if their router is in a different room than the satellite receiver.

These adapters use the HomePlug standard, better for us than the DS2 than is causing all the trouble in the UK, but not always by much.

DISH receivers use Ethernet to communicate with the network for ordering pay per view, etc, if there is no landline telephone connection available. Most users already have these receivers connected to landlines, so hopefully there will not be a wide deployment.

If HF interference is traced to one of these systems, the options available to remedy the situation are as follows:

Do nothing. Maybe the FCC will help, but probably not. At this point you will have to give up utility DXing.

Ask the users to:

Move the router nearer the satellite receiver;
Run network cabling;
Run a long landline cord to the receiver.

Obviously, this last one is probably the simplest, unless the customer only has a cell phone and a high speed Internet connection.

As tecnology evolves, and everyone comes up with more uses for Ethernet than communicating with laptops via Wi-Fi, home PLT adapters will become standard items seen all over. Unless something changes, at this point the HF utility hobby will be over.

Sorry, but it's that simple, unless something happens to change this sad situation. I'm out of ideas. ARRL won't help and I don't see the necessary unity in the USA.

I hope this is too gloomy.

Editorial: UK Ofcom Screws the Pooch On PLT!

This letter from the UK Office of Communications, as reprinted on the UKQRM mailing list, shows once again that the USA has no monopoly on corporate butt-saving by government regulatory agencies. This masterpiece, in fact, surpasses even the most incredible stuff churned out by our FCC, and that is no small achievement.

Whilst there is evidence that some PLT apparatus fails to meet the ETSI Harmonised Standard EN 55022, there insufficient evidence [sic] that the emissions generated are causing harmful interference, more generally, to consumers.

The actual number of complaints received by Ofcom attributed to power line telecommunications equipment remains extremely low in comparison to the number of products in use. In September 2008, Ofcom received 6 interference reports from radio enthusiasts, and this was preceded by 15 in August; prior to this, there were around 20 others. I understand that all interference cases have either been or are being resolved.

We have considered your comments regarding the Comtrend/BT product, and generic PLT equipment; and references to provisions that allow for enforcement action to be taken.

Ofcom do not consider that the current situation justifies taking enforcement action to remove PLT apparatus from the market. In making this decision, Ofcom have considered our statutory duties and functions included in the Communications Act 2003 and EMC Regulations 2006.

For enforcement action to remove PLT equipment to be considered proportionate, Ofcom would need to establish that the apparatus does not meet the EMC essential requirements and generates harmful interference.

At this time we consider a proportionate response to be, to deal with the complaints of interference received on as and when they arise on a case-by-case basis.

We do, of course, reserve the right to adapt our enforcement policy to meet with any change in the circumstances, for example, where we observe a significant increase in the number of interference cases received (where PLT emissions are proven to be excessive); or, of course, due to a change in the type of spectrum user being affected by the interference (a good example would be a service concerned with national safety and security). Naturally, we would need to consult with BERR regarding any change in our enforcement approach.
Regards

Clive

:: Clive Corrie
Investigation Policy Manager
Direct Dial: +44 (0) 121 423 5205
Mobile: +44 (0) 7711 239703
clive.corrie@ofcom.org.uk

:: Ofcom
74 Ridgacre Lane
Birmingham
B32 1EN
www.ofcom.org.uk

By this logic, I guess a company flooding the market with baby formula known by regulators to contain poison would be within the law if only 40 or so families complained when their babies died.

Amazing, this deregulation Thang.................

UK OfCom Official Statement on PLC

Admits there is a problem, though in a fairly dismissive manner. Doesn't take into account that political apathy guarantees that less than 1% of people with a problem, if that, will ever complain formally to authorities. Notes that EMC rules will continue to be enforced in the UK:

http://www.ofcom.org.uk/radiocomms/ifi/enforcement/plt/

Power Line Telecommunications (PLT)

Power line telecommunications (PLT) is a technology that can carry data on a conventional electrical power system using a radio frequency carrier signal.

PLT equipment can be used to interconnect computers with other devices in the home. It is not considered radio equipment for the purposes of equipment regulation.

As with all electrical and electronic products sold in the UK, PLT equipment is required to meet the relevant regulations before it can be placed on the market. In particular, it must comply with the Electromagnetic Compatibility Regulations 2006 (the EMC Regulations) which are based on a European Directive.

The person who places products on the market (usually the manufacturer or the importer) must ensure that the products comply and apply the ‘CE’ mark.

The UK government department for Business Enterprise and Regulatory Reform (BERR) is responsible for overseeing the EMC Regulations. Enforcement powers are delegated to local Trading Standards offices and to Ofcom where there is a radio spectrum protection or management issue.

Ofcom estimates there are around 500,000 pieces of PLT equipment in use in the UK. We have received around 40 individual complaints of interference attributed to PLT equipment. All of these complaints are in the process of being investigated or have been successfully resolved.

It is often the case that electrical equipment that is used in the home has to comply with the EMC regulations. Some of this equipment has the capacity to cause interference to other radiocommunications equipment in certain circumstances; this can be due to the manner in which it is installed or operated.

Ofcom can provide advice and assistance to those who complain of interference with radiocommunications equipment. Any individuals who wish to report specific cases of interference that may be caused by PLT apparatus, or any other source, should contact Ofcom’s Advisory Team on 0300 123 3333 for further assistance.

We continue to liaise with BERR and other interested stakeholders in respect of PLT interference and will provide further updates on any significant developments.

RSGB Letter to UK Authorities Re:PLC

The Radio Society of Great Britain has sent a letter to the British Ofcom regarding the Society's perception of a weak response on the dire matter of Power Line Communications.

While RSGB has expressed considerable concern over strong HF interference caused by the wide deployment of home Ethernet power line adapters, Ofcom has spent two years making vague excuses based on a legal issue regarding the European Union.

As anyone who has been following the situation knows, politicians worldwide have been reluctant to rule decisively in PLC matters. Generally, they have preferred to see what the marketplace does, rather than be perceived as against "new technology." This has led to the approval by Germany of home computer networking gear that is clearly in violation of ITU regulations regarding access to spectrum. Further, these units do not generally meet their claimed specs as submitted for CE certification. These specs come from a self-test in a best-case situation which is unlikely to be replicated in the real world.

Here is a portion of the RSGB letter as published on the Society web site:

The RSGB has recently received a reply from Ofcom in response to a PLT complaint made almost two years ago. The Society has in turn expressed its’ dismay at the contents of this letter and has responded accordingly with a letter from the President. The following edited extract will hopefully show that the Society is not about to roll over and accept what amounts to “shoddy service” from the regulator -

“The Radio Society of Great Britain understands that as the product in question was declared compliant in Germany, Ofcom extended the usual courtesy of asking BNetzA to investigate as the home authority in the first instance. You say that BNetzA has investigated but decided not to take enforcement action but you have given no reasons. The implication is that you will not be taking any further action. However as the product is available from UK outlets we do request that you continue to investigate our complaint of non-compliance. You will know that if your investigations confirm the non-compliance, the fact that the German authorities have chosen not to take enforcement action is not a bar to the UK doing so under the principle of national subsidiarity. The integrity of New Approach Directives is in fact dependent on Member States acting where non-compliance is found. The procedure under Article 10 of the EMC Directive or Article 9 of the RTTE Directive provides the method by which Member States must notify the Commission of such independent action.

The Society submitted a detailed complaint case nearly two years ago and is still awaiting positive action by the UK regulatory authorities. You will appreciate that there is considerable frustration among HF radio users about this matter, many of whom are members of the RSGB. This delay, attributed to restructuring, is frankly deplorable, unprofessional and certainly does not reflect well on the neutrality of the administration or the stated Statutory Duty of “Ensuring the optimal use of the electro-magnetic spectrum”. We believe the recent increase in reported incidents of interference received from licensed radio amateurs and short-wave broadcast listeners alike and attributed to units from various manufacturers represents only a small percentage of those suffering with this problem, with the majority not yet aware of what is causing the harmful interference to their reception.
It is understood a number of sufferers have already written to their MPs and MEPs in respect to this problem and no doubt these letters will reach your desk in due course. In the meantime we look forward to hearing of the results of your investigations as referred to above and the pursuance of the “enforcement policy in line with stakeholders needs””.

More On PLC Trouble in Portugal

More ominous news from Portugal via UKQRM:

Hi everybody,

I'm Joe, SWL CT0347 and CT4AN, Amateur for several decades and space telecom researcher. Thanks to the owner and moderators for giving me the opportunity to be a member of your Group.

I am very worry about the situation of using main power lines (inside houses or not) with other kind of signals not beeing 50Hz.In my country, Portugal, we have now a new big problem with that kind of signal on wide & broadband TV distribution and Internet services. A few years ago, we had our Power Company trying to establish BPL but, with the strong oposition of SWL, Ham operators and CB's, we finished their business.

Now we have PLC distribution inside the houses, for MEO services (broadband Internet, TV and phone) made by Portuguese Telecom PT, using [law suit avoidance mode -hugh] plc boxes; we are beeing all blocked on HF - all short wave listening, CB band, Amateur HF Bands, etc are getting impossible with the noise produced by those equipments, covering on full data-streem all HF from 2MHz till 35 MHz. It's a junk ... and THE END OF OUR SHORTWAVES.

Even with "gaps" on it's spectrum, located only in some Amateur HF Bands, the QRM is very-very strong, with levels of >80 dB/uV detected in a distance of 200 meters from the focus. The "notch" (when in operation ...) have 40dB of attenuation in the best, that is insuficient to preserve the noise-floor level needed for DX communications on Shortwave Bands (-110dBm minimum). That's a mess ...I would like to hear from you about your PLC experiences in your countries, with your PTT's Authorities, with your Clubs and Associations, and exchange information and possible common solutions and strifes.

GOOD DX'S BUT ... WITHOUT PLC AND OTHER DECREPIT TECHNOLOGY !!
J.F.// CT4AN

Latest UK PLC News

The situation is evolving fast with regard to home Ethernet power line adapters which create massive interference to HF in the UK.

"Mike in West Sussex" has finally made a connection with a real live human being someplace other than the Asian call center who works for BT and knows something:

Just had a phone call from one Julie O Sullivan who may be the BT Chairman's PA. She was calling in regard to the letter I sent him just yesterday!

Stated, very unusual never heard of this before, I am going to make some enquiries within BT.

I said that she may like to Google the problem in which case it would become apparent how wide spread it was.

She was insistent that I took her name and number down!

So finally I got a shot into the BT heart.

I'll keep you posted on any more developments.

Meantime, if anyone else here is suffering this QRM please report it today to Ofcom and write a letter to the BT Chairman about it. Do it today so that we all ride the storm its clearly stirring up!

BT is, of course, the big British telecom provider, following privatisation of what used to (I believe) be a government telcom company. Now, it's a huge communication conglomerate with a global reach, like any other big company. Those who deal with them report that it has essentially replaced a government bureaucracy with a corporate bureaucracy.

Ofcom is the British FCC, created when the regulation of telecom was removed from the old department within the Post Office. As with our FCC, its mandate seems to be evolving away from preventing harmful interference to licensed radio services, and towards doing whatever maximizes free competition in the marketplace.

By way of background, the BT Home Hub is the home router/modem for their high speed Internet connection service. The trouble is caused by the wall wart adapters that are sold with BT's video service, which sends on-demand video from the Home Hub to TVs elsewhere in the home. Some of these use the DS2 chipset, which can be notched to exclude ham bands, but is otherwise the most efficient HF jammer ever invented. It is completely out of compliance with European EMC regulations, and it has caused problems throughout the UK.

Apparently, BT will replace these, but the customer has to ask. Then the older ones show up on eBay, since at 99 British pounds a pair when new, they're not exactly throwaways.

It is becoming evident that the problem is caused by short wave listeners who do not want to become involved. The BPL/PLC "industry" is able to argue that its equipment is clean because "nobody complains." Obviously, people with problems have not made them known to the FCC and the companies behind this badly designed and misbegotten technology. I realize that HF utility listeners in particular tend to be very low-profile, given the various secrecy of communications laws. However, the stakes here involve the survival of the entire pastime. It's best to fight now, before it's all over.