RSGB Responds on PLT/PLC Report

The Radio Society of Great Britain has posted the following response to inquiries about its position on the recently published consulting report regarding the electromagnetic compatibility issues surrounding home power line communications in the UK.

This discussion is on the UK QRM group on Yahoo. From the start, this group has played a key role in the discussion of this issue among hams and SWLs in the United Kingdom. It was started by long time Utility World contributor Mike in West Sussex, who has hung in there despite personal tragedies which would have defeated lesser people.

Given the context, we should best regard this as a semi off the record statement. Here you go:

I have seen several requests here for a comment from someone in RSGB on all this.

In the GB2RS script for this week should be the following:

Ofcom has this week published its long-awaited report "The Likelihood and Extent of Radio Frequency Interference from In-Home PLT Devices" This 156 page report assesses the likelihood of interference to various users of the radio spectrum over the next decade. The main conclusion is that action is needed to reduce the interference footprint of PLT devices. This action could take various forms, and the Society is considering the report in detail prior to initiating discussions with Ofcom about the follow-on actions it intends to take. We expect the position to become clearer over the next few weeks and months.

As background, there are a number of issues to consider about the report's recommendations, not the least is whether Ofcom has accepted them! Beyond that there are questions about the effectiveness of the mitigation measures which PA recommend, and whether they go anywhere near meeting the essential requirements of the EMCD.

RSGB is considering all these matters, and will make its views known in due course.

Don, G3BJ

UK Ofcom Publishes Key PLT/PLC Report

A long-awaited report from PA Consulting Group, as commissioned by the UK Office of Communications (Ofcom), has been released.

The report is entitled "The Likelihood and Extent of Radio Frequency Interference from In-Home PLT Devices." It carries a publication date of "21 June 2010."

This is a dense, highly detailed document with 156 pages. However, its conclusions are clearly written and easy to understand.

Basically, if nothing changes in the design of the home network adapters sold to the public, the UK can expect significant degradation of many radio systems and some hardwired services such as DSL, by 2020. Affected radio comm spectrum would include nearly all of HF outside amateur bands, and most of VHF.

PA, however, remains hopeful that design changes can reduce such interference.

Here are the most relevant parts from the conclusions in the summary at the beginning. Those wanting to read more and make their own conclusions can get the entire document at this link.

Page 1:

1 Executive summary

Power Line Telecommunications (PLT) devices are used for data distribution in the home

Power Line Telecommunications (PLT) is the collective term for various forms of communication over wiring used for supplying electricity (termed the 'mains' wiring throughout this report). The most recent developments in PLT devices address the consumer market for in home connectivity as an alternative to WiFi or data cabling. It is these in-home PLT devices that are the specific focus of this study. In-home PLT devices are growing in popularity and, in particular, their use in BT Vision installations in the UK has made the UK one of the biggest users of in-home PLT devices in Europe.

Ofcom has received complaints of interference caused by PLT devices and has requested this study The majority of PLT devices on the market today operate at HF frequencies and, while they are not intended to radiate, there is evidence of interference to other HF users which has resulted in a number of complaints to Ofcom. While most of these complaints have been resolved, Ofcom is concerned that the problem may grow as the number of PLT devices deployed increases over time. Higher data rate PLT devices operating up to 300MHz have also started to emerge in the UK market and so potential interference at VHF is also a concern.

Ofcom has asked PA to assess the likelihood and impact of RF interference from in-home PLT devices over the next 5 to 10 years.

Our results show that users of sensitive radio systems may increasingly suffer interference from PLT devices

In this study we have taken a statistical approach to quantifying the probability of interference occurring as PLT devices become more commonplace. We have concluded that if uptake increases in line with our market forecasts, there will be a high probability of interference to some existing spectrum users at both HF and VHF by 2020 if PLT device features do not change from those currently implemented.

However, within this timescale, in addition to the existing practice of notching International Amateur Radio Union (IARU) bands, interference mitigation features such as power control and smart notching are expected to have been implemented in PLT devices. Our results indicate that the introduction of these features will be enough to reduce interference to negligible levels in the majority of these cases. The exception to this is the safety critical aeronautical bands which we recommend are notched by default rather than by smart notching. [Smart notching only responds to very strong and persistent signals like SWBC, not weak USB comm. -Hugh]

And Page 3:

It is important that mitigating features are implemented in future PLT devices.

The majority of PLT devices in the UK to date have been issued as part of the BT Vision package; however, there is churn in this market, and it should not be assumed that the existing installed base is traceable or could be updated to incorporate these features. We do however assume that the current practice of PLT devices being upgraded in cases where they have been identified by Ofcom as sources of interference will continue and ensure that the existing installed base is gradually replaced where needed.

While power control and smart notching are already part of the product roadmaps of the PLT vendors that we consulted as part of this study, we recommend that where possible the introduction of these features is formalised to ensure that their introduction can be relied upon.

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.

RSGB Challenges UK Ofcom Regarding Home Powerline Telecom

For the first time, the Radio Society of Great Britain (RSGB) has directly challenged the UK's Office of Communication (Ofcom), regarding its technical standards and regulatory policies in the matter of home power line communication (PLA/PLT) interference to licensed radio services.

In a letter written to Ofcom Chairman Colette Bowe, over the signature of RSGB Director Donald F. Beattie, the RSGB gives a detailed response to Ofcom's official statement made last September. RSGB takes issue with some of the Ofcom assertions in the September statement, and asks for clarification in a number of other areas.

Excerpts:

"Ofcom believes the electromagnetic disturbance produced by this technology is an inevitable by‐product of its operation and not attributed to poor design or manufacturing."

We disagree ‐ there is poor design involved here. The trade‐off between headline data rate and emission level is wrongly set. It is only an inevitable by‐product of its operation if that operation is aimed at transmitting an unreasonably high data rate.

...

Emissions are an inevitable consequence of an unsuitable technology.

...

Our underlying concern is that the invaluable asset of the radio spectrum is being progressively sacrificed to allow a polluting technology to flourish, based on the mistaken argument that there is public good involved. Arguments are being mustered to support this strategy, which have little or no basis in fact. We see the inevitable consequence of the current policy as being the consignment of the High Frequency Radio Spectrum to history. Once this has happened, it will not be possible to reverse matters. International standards exist to provide for sensible coexistence of services, and the RSGB contends that the setting aside of such standards for expediency is not in the long‐term public interest.

The full text of this letter, with plenty of numbers, cites, and technical details, is available at the RSGB web site. One can also find details regarding the RSGB Spectrum Defence Fund.

Expect this controversy to heat up. Due to the ever-higher data speeds required in new broadband plans, manufacturers of next-generation PLT units are using much wider RF bandwidths, well into VHF. It's not just about HF any more.

The Last Time This Blog Will Ever Mention Power Line Telecommunication (Unless HF Becomes Useless)

http://swling.com/blog/

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?

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.

Alleged HomePlug Document Suggests Awareness of Interference Issue

Publically, the two standardizing industry associations for the HomePlug and DS2 powerline communication standards act as if there's no problem with RF emissions from devices which are basically wideband transmitters putting appreciable HF energy into AC power lines, which unintentionally serve as very efficient transmitting antennas.

A document alleged to be an internal "executive seminar" at the HomePlug Alliance has been posted to the files section of UKQRM. If this is real, it strongly suggests that someone working for the HomePlug Alliance is completely aware that a problem exists. Members of UKQRM can go to that group's files section and download this document.

What we have here is something at least resembling an internal presentation of PowerPoint-like slides stored as a .PDF file. Its heading on each slide is "Homeplug Executive Seminar." It shows measurements proving that their devices do not meet European electromagnetic compatibility standards, and had to gain the CE mark by exploiting loopholes. Subsequent slides claim that it's all just a problem with the standard test setup, which is simply unfair to powerline devices, that's all.

If this means that the whole idea of sending data through active power lines is so stupid that excessive RF power must be used to make it work even a little, I agree.

From page 4:

Safety, immunity and harmonics are correct but almost all PLC devices pass over the CISPR 22 class A, B limits so failed the test and we could not generate (directly) the DoC (Declaration of Conformity) needed for Europe

This is accompanied by a chart which looks like a dBuV over frequency run. Indeed, it shows 85 dBuV all the way across HF under their test parameters, except for sharp notches in some (NOT ALL) ham radio bands. This is indeed well in violation of EMC standards.

What do you do if you fail the test? Why claim that the standard is too old fashioned, of course, and rig up your own test so your product passes, despite a known EMC problem. Continuing, on page 5:

Several studies have been done on this current issue
• Some experts have demonstrated that the current interface used for the test was not accurate for the powerline and have proposed their own schematics (gaining up to 10 dB so passing class A and B)

Few competent bodies have proposed their own method
• They created their own measurement method and built for the manufacturer, the TCF (Technical Construction File: this is the second official way to gain the CE mark, specially when a unit do not follow at 100 % the harmonized standards)
• So they demonstrated with their method that the unit will not harm the “network”
• With this TCF, the CE mark could be affixed to the product so the PLC device could be sold in Europe

The "Final Solution?" Why, pressure international bodies to change the law, of course. Page 6:

A sub group of the CISPR was created to work on this issue
• The interface used to test the CISPR 22 test was developped a long time ago and is not fair for a measurement on the power line
• CISPR SC I PLT TG is working to find a test method that will properly test power line communications ports.

And, if that doesn't work, of course maybe if you lobby hard enough, the ITU will simply clear out a huge swath of HF for you. Page 8:

As of today the best case for this new CISPR I 89
standard is 2009
ITU-R: We have also investigated the possibility to
obtain a dedicated band for the PLC, it will take if
accepted around 10 to 15 years…
During this interim period the TCF will be always
the best compromise but could be subject to
discussion…

In other news, BPL is not dead. IBM announced that it seeks to build an extensive system to bring broadband to rural areas. In other words, if you try to escape the cities, you will find that HF has been jammed in the country too.

I'm glad I'm not a conspiratologist. The idea of a worldwide total blockage of HF would have me going on Art Bell (or his replacement) by now.

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.................

British Telecom to Continue Specifying Spectrum Polluting Equipment

In a move that surprised everyone with any knowledge of the current situation, British Telecom has renewed its contract with Comtrend to buy its DS2-based PowerGrid 902 home networking adapters for another year.

This is despite full knowledge that the normal on-spec operation of the DS2 chipset continuously transmits a strong signal across most of HF, except for an audible reduction in known international amateur bands. Utility and international broadcasting DXing (including DRM) cannot co-exist with this technology, and everyone knows it.

It is obvious that BT intends to deploy this equipment in millions of homes throughout the UK, while solving the few interference complaints on a case by case basis. Note that this solution requires that the users of the home video system will approve installation of a hard-wired network. If they don't, the complainer will need a new hobby. Too bad about all that money they spent on receivers and equipment. The only recourse left will be a long, expensive, and unpredictable test case in the courts, against extremely well funded and connected corporate interests.

To show how well this approach is working, note the case of longtime Utility Logs contributor "Mike" in West Sussex. He is on something like his third round of Ofcom complaints and technician visits by Ofcom and BT to his neighbors. Every time one is resolved, a new one starts up within a matter of weeks.

It should now be completely obvious that public access to short wave radio is now considered expendable by most of the world's governing bodies. Maybe someone will try to change this, and maybe they won't.

Here's the announcement.

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””.

Hope for UK PLC Threat

Good news for HF comes so rarely that I'd be derelict not to report when it does. It appears that, after many meetings and hand-wringings, the UK's privatized phone company (BT) and its privatized version of the US FCC (OfCom) have arrived at something of a compromise. I wish I'd been a fly on the wall at THOSE meetings!

The result is that, according to OfCom, Mike's uncooperative neighbors in West Sussex have finally accepted a hard-wired solution after being "persuaded" by BT personnel.

In my opinion, the whole damn industry should accept a hard-wired solution. I've got TV and network cables all over my baseboards and around doorways and all that. What's the problem?

But then, I'm weird.

Mike reports the PLC units should be gone within a week, and he'll get use of his radios back. If this happens, it's a much faster resolution than I've gotten used to from the underfunded US FCC.

Details on UKQRM.

UK QRM Group Mentioned in Amateur Radio Newsline

Amateur Radio Newsline is a respected (and copyrighted) voice broadcast with MP3 files and written transcripts available here. It is heard by thousands of hams worldwide.

This week's Newsline mentioned the PLC interference situation in the UK:

Radio Netherlands reports that a new Yahoo Group called UKQRM has been formed. This, as a meeting place for those who use the high frequency bands and who are suffering from interference caused by Broadband over Power Lines or BPL.

In announcing the group, Radio Netherlands Worldwide's Andy Sennitt is quoted as saying that the traditional DX clubs have been very slow to latch-on to the threat posed by this technology. Because of this it is encouraging to see that at least some listeners in the United Kingdom are trying to raise awareness of the problem.

More at the link.

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.

PLC Links - Get Educated and Fight!

A new Yahoo! group and mailing list have been established for BT Vision/ HomePlug/ PLC interference victims in the UK, and anyone else worldwide who wants to help formulate strategies for preserving the HF listening hobby in all countries. It is at:
http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/UKQRM/

Other Links:

British Telecom
BT Vision (all this trouble for us, so people can watch Desperate Housewives in the bedroom)
BT Group Wiki Entry (we're a long way from the post office!)
BT Vision Wiki Entry
Typical UK interference problem
British OfCom Investigations
Taiwanese mfr of the DH-10PF
AcBel spec sheet
Why the 200 MB claim by the mfr AND in the BT web store is false advertising
The BPL/PLC industry's side of the story
What the interference sounds like
OfCom complaint web page
Severe interference in Hobart, Australia (YouTube video)

HF: Defend It or Lose It!

I have never been more serious than right now. The use of HF radio is OVER unless all of us organize and fight with a single voice.

The situation:

Everyone wants high speed Internet access and digital video on demand. The current Internet cannot carry all this information. Whoever solves this problem will become very wealthy indeed, and will also have made a major contribution.

Unfortunately, in the rush to open up new information pipelines, a number of ill-conceived or self-serving schemes have emerged. For our purposes in the radio hobby, the worst of these is communication using power lines, which almost always involves putting wideband RF energy into ready-made antennas by any other name.

We haven't learned to live with BPL (Broadband Over Power Lines) yet, but now there is a far worse problem. It's PLC (Power Line Communication), and it's taking off like wildfire in Europe and South America. It's supported by the United Powerline Association, a global industry association with several very powerful and influential corporate members.

The first I knew that anything had gone badly, nightmarishly wrong was when two of this column's contributors in the UK suddenly stopped doing radio altogether. They reported huge blasts of high-pitched noise, hash, and general crud blanketing everything pretty much from DC to daylight.

Since this was new to the UK, it took a while to figure out what was going on there. What's happening is that British Telecom (BT; a phone company that also operates HF comm sites, and thus should know better) is providing its customers with power line adapters which send Ethernet through the house wiring. Not the power company's lines, but the wires in your house.

You plug one adapter from the Internet/Video on Demand box (called a BT Home Hub) into the power line, and plug in the second one near a television you want to use for the video.

It is probably well known to most technically aware people that Ethernet is basically RF. These adapters are broadband HF transmitters which turn your house into a giant radio station which can radiate hundreds of feet.

These are being made by the usual companies, and being widely promoted as the solution to the previous expense of running Ethernet cables through homes. These things will undoubtedly spread worldwide if they are not stopped right now.


The future:

It's not hard to imagine the result of millions of these gadgets being installed all over populated areas. The side effect will be the worldwide deployment the most effective HF jammer ever invented. It will create vast areas in our populated regions that are little more than HF exclusion zones. The HF spectrum, which used to belong to the public by way of its national and international licensing bodies, will have been hijacked!

As long as there's a buck to be made, there will be influential people and companies seeking to send RF through any available conductors for computer networking and digital media. Wires were designed to conduct electricity, fence off property, etc etc. They were never intended to be used in place of cable or Cat5 twisted pair. When used in this manner, they become antennas. It's simple physics.


The only conclusion:

HF is over unless we fight for it. As a hobby, we must become as united as the corporations we need to fight. We must make it clear that denying the use of internationally regulated radio services so that someone else can profit from cheap, badly designed consumer electronics is NEVER all right - EVER.

Let's get started.