Ofcom forced to publish tests on dodgy radio kit 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 …
This post has been deleted by its author
"but as the mains wiring isn't shielded those signals leak out and can knock out sensitive radio users such as HAM operators."
I have two thoughts on this, firstly:
1) Really? It surprises me that a low frequency signal thats travelled across half the world will be knocked out by a device that works at very high bandwidth and hence wont travel far
2) Do I care? I know this is selfish, but really how many HAM operators are there? And more to the point, how many might be near (in fact incredibly near) a supply that might be causing interference?
Well done Ofcom for exercising some common sense for a change methinks.
You're obviously missing some fundamental points here.
1. Powerline stuff uses a broadband signal and so covers a very wide range of frequencies from very low to VHF.
2. A signal that has travelled across half the world may well have little residual energy at its destination and will be easily swamped by a local signal. Think nanowatts and picowatts.
3. If I set up some equipment and knocked out your TV and radio reception then presumably that wouldn't matter either because there's only one of you.
4. Standards are there for a reason, in order that a multitude of different systems can coexist.
5. Ofcom appears to be volunteering to be abolished, seeing as it's useless at one of its primary functions.
If Ofcom had said they'd measured the kit and while technically in breach of the regulations they were not going to do anything about already installed kit as it would be too disruptive but the manufacturer should not supply anymore infringing kit I'm sure most people would not have been bothered. A judicial review might have forced them to do differently but that's the nature of things.
However this looks like either a degree of incompetence or duplicity (or both) and shows them up as dodgy bunch. So how are we to trust them when they are supposed to be enforcing standards that really matter.
This post has been deleted by its author
Bear in mind that ham operators worldwide generally have access to small bits of spectrum scattered all over the bands, squeezed between the other legitimate users of those bands. Anything which interferes with ham radio has the potential to interfere with everything else, which includes leisure services like TV & FM radio, emergency services, and other professional users.
It's Ofcom's job to ensure fair treatment for *all* users, which of course it hasn't done since it was turned into the government's spectrum pimp.
As with any other law, once the people charged with enforcing it sell out, lots of other unscrupulous folks will jump on the bandwagon and start abusing it because they know they won't be censured. Just because ham users are in a minority doesn't mean that their concerns can be ignored. That way lies tyranny, or anarchy.
You sir appear to have missed the point by a farily wide mark; if you think corruption, bare-faced lying and the supression of truth demonstrate a modicum of common sense you should apply for a job in the government.
What will you think of their common sense once we the taxpayer get lumped with another euro-fine for our goverments wilful law breaking?
I dislike these devices also (UVB-76 ftw) but I wouldn't go that far. It is an absolute travesty that these were even allowed to be sold in the first place and I think things will only change when the first Rescue helicopter/Police car/Army/whatever user finds that they can only hear the beeps and chirps of the interference.
Cue the standard argument process:
"I live in a 6 million year old house with 5 meter thick walls, I couldn't possibly run CAT-5/6, that would just be what a MENTAL would do"
"I am a radio HAM and I'd like to strongly physically violate anyone who either uses these devices"
and so on and so forth
3: The kit also interferes with FM. Lots of people use that.
4: Its in breach of the regulations, and they've been caught lying by saying otherwise.
They appear to be saying its OK to break the regulations if you have the right friends.
They have been cracking down on Pirate FM radio stations for years for creating minimal interference Of course when BT do it, its fine.
IMO, There supposed to be a regulator. Its not OFCOM's job to decide what is and isnt in the public interest.
At least we now have proof that ofcom are a bunch of crooks who are on the make, even if nothing will get done about it.
Also, not enforcing the law because they reasoned it's "not in the public interest" as the world and it's dog was already using this kit? That's a hell of a precedent for a government body to set, lets hope they apply the same reasoning to the tera-bytes of films sitting on my hard drive.
Killing off this kit would upset one very big Telco - it's the size of that company that's probably kept it all quiet. The argument was that this isn't radio equipment, but it sure is a potential wrecker of the spectrum below whatever nominal data rate it's trying to achieve.
This post has been deleted by its author
Personally I would like the see the data for all the adaptors that have such already submitted, and ask the regulator to obtain data for any that are missing. I originally got, and still use, a few HomePlug AV adaptors before I was aware of some of the issues. These are from Zyxel and Devolo but, although i've seen a couple of test results from other manufacturers (e.g. Comtrend), i've not been able to find any test or certification data for these.
This issue is something i'm thinking about and could effect my usage of the adaptors, or how they are setup on the wiring, but i'd like to know more before I spend time or money sorting things out.. e.g. what notching is present in the devices.
If anyone is issuing another FOI then i'd be interesting in getting as much information as possible on as wide a range of adaptors as possible - how likely is that ?
This post has been deleted by its author
Over the road from me got the kit just before last Christmas. When they're streaming video (it regularly goes on in the evening) I instantly lose a couple of DVB multiplexes, the ones carrying BBC1-2 and CH4. Fortunately I can just switch back to analogue, but not for too much longer. I shall probably move before the switch off happens though.
>> When they're streaming video (it regularly goes on in the evening) I instantly lose a couple of DVB multiplexes, the ones carrying BBC1-2 and CH4. Fortunately I can just switch back to analogue ...
But you shouldn't have to switch back to analogue (which won't be an option for anyone at all in a couple of years). The point of EMC regulations is so that people shouldn't have this sort of problem. And to all those imbeciles with a "it's only a few old beardies, why should we care ?' attitude - FFS it's isn't just Radio Amateurs that are affected, it's just that Radio Amateurs are the only ones prepared to kick up a fuss about it. FYI, even our CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) has expressed concerns as some of the newer kit risks interfering with aviation radio systems. Still think it's a storm about nothing ?
I'm actually not at all surprised that TV reception has been shown to be affected. While the kit itself may only be designed to generate frequencies up to a few tens of MHz, when driving something that's as badly matches as some random bit of T&E with multiple joints and branches, it's highly likely that spurious emissions will go several order of magnitude higher in frequency. So that's the TV bands splattered over, and above that is one of the aviation bands.
One of the excuses OfCon has used for inaction is that "few have complained, and most of them are radio hams". It also seems that many people (radio hams included) haven't bothered complaining because they don't expect anything will be done about it. So please, anyone who has been affected at all, please complain to OfCon so they can no longer use that excuse.
Apart from the immediate problems caused, this case is important for the precedent it sets. As others have jokingly said, does it now mean that if you give a load of them away quickly enough, you'll be let off as it would inconvenience the public to have them banned ? Well enjoy the repercussions of that if it comes to pass and your TV goes off.
On a ore serious note, perhaps some of use should set up some public demonstrations. Set up something similar but designed to knock out TV. We'd soon see the "I don't care, it's only a few old beardies" attitude change then !
Thank you for a well considered reply. Here is a relevant extract dug up from Ofcom's site:
"The BBC are now responsible for investigating complaints of interference to domestic radio and television.
"Potential causes of interference inside the home can include central heating thermostats, fridge-freezers and some dimmer switches, for example on halogen lights. Under some circumstances, radio or other electrical equipment outside your home can also cause interference.
"Before reporting interference to the BBC, you should check your TV or Radio installation to ensure it is operating correctly. In some cases, faults such as poor aerial connections, can cause be the cause of the interference.
So, clearly it's not Ofcom's problem then, and from that it would seem the fault is most likely to be of my own doing. Despite possessing an engineering degree, I feel quite put off before I have even started.
This post has been deleted by its author
This post has been deleted by its author
You seem to have not noticed the reports, scattered through the thread, of these powerline networks interfering with other licenced uses such as TV broadcasts.
Radio Amateurs have to pass tests of technical knowledge, and take care to maintain their transmitters so as not to interfere with other users. So they have test equipment which can detect and measure the effects. They are also scattered across the country.
Radio Amateurs are, in matters such as this, somewhat like the miner's canary, which were more susceptible to noxious gases. When the canaries fall over, you know something is wrong.
Ofcom are idiots. This seems to go far beyond the usual discretion found in all law enforcement.
Ofcom is an evidence-based regulator that suppressed evidence and refused to regulate. The interference from these devices can radiate over several hundred yards and make weak-signal comms impossible. Closer in it swamps even strong signals. You only need one pair of these things in your village to wreck your radio listening.
The EMC reports that Ofcom have now been forced to disclose prove that these PLT devices vastly breach the rules and laws regarding EMC compliance, but Ofcom chose to suppress these reports and deny everything.
They lied to the public, to MPs, to Ministers and to MEPs in the process.
Ofcom is not well-liked by our current government, and I hope strong action is taken to bring those responsible to justice.
This post has been deleted by its author
There's this dance you can do (and which it appears the sellers of this kit are doing):
The harmonised standards you can use to demonstrate conformity with the essential requirements are effectively a shortcut. Meet the standards and you have what's termed a presumption of conformity for the apparatus. If you don't meet the standards (either because you haven't tested to them, or you actually fail them), then you can write some weasel words (the technical term is "extended justification") to explain why you don't need to meet the standard - perhaps your apparatus is only ever going to be used in a screened room, or on a desolate hillside miles from the nearest neighbour to [potentially] interfere with.
Sometimes these weasel words are just that, other times they are wholly justifiable.
So, it isn't always as clear cut as "meets standards==pass, doesn't==fail". Which isn't to say that it isn't clear-cut in this case - I haven't seen the margin of fail, or the extended justification.
In response to the ignorant and selfish Andy97 and GatesFanbois. Since when did radio amateurs use wax discs? I'm afraid your childish posts just reveal your lack of knowledge. AR is not an old-fashioned hobby. Many of us use cutting-edge digital techniques and digital signal processing is in common usage. Communication via satellite and moonbounce is in regular usage.
We have rules and laws which were put in place to keep the radio spectrum clean, and these need to be obeyed. Ofcom is the UK regulator but they failed to enforce the rules, thus allowing the widespread pollution of the RF spectrum to take place.
It doesn't matter how many people are affected, it matters that the law is being openly broken.
Perhaps you wouldn't mind being told by the police that they weren't going to investigate the burglary of your home because hey, only one person was affected and anyway the burglars only took your TV and a few quid?
These sorts of mindless comments reveal a deep and profound ignorance of the facts. Anyone that actually understands the importance of the HF and VHF radio spectrum would not make such foolish statements. There is absolutely no excuse for allowing any form of "power line" communications scheme where it leaks noise into the local radio spectrum.
There are still laws applicable and even if it isn't in ofcom's remit to prosecute, then it should at the very least have referred the problem to the Home Office with the request that somebody else be appointed to prosecute. Or perhaps ofcom's remit should have been expanded to include enforcement of devices that aren't radio equipment but nevertheless unlawfully transmit unintentional radio signals in excess of the permitted levels.
If nothing else, the company concerned could probably be prosecuted either for bearing the CE mark which does not comply with an applicable law, since the CE mark is the manufacturer's legal assertion that the device complies with all applicable laws.
Thanks for the thumbs down, somehow I think a lot of you are full of bull....
Firstly, if ANY of these devices had any chance of interfering with emergency services then I was be AMAZED if OFCOM didnt pounce on this. So I will take those comments as irrelevant noise (ha! cheap pun)
Secondly, PLC are sold in the US. This is the country that has crazy regulations on RF inteference. Thats why anything anything sold to the US has a metal cage around it just in case some RF might interfer with something.
Yes of course PLC will emmit. They couldnt work if they didnt. I just cant believe that its such a big problem that it warrants the banning of PLCs.
>> Secondly, PLC are sold in the US. This is the country that has crazy regulations on RF inteference. Thats why anything anything sold to the US has a metal cage around it just in case some RF might interfer with something.
There is a saying that when in a deep hole, stop digging. You exhibit a good ignorance of facts with that statement. Firstly, not everything sold in the USA has a metal case - they get a lot of plastic cased "wall warts" just like we do. A lot of the power supplies sold there are **exactly** the same as those sold here, and nearly identical except for the pins sticking in the case of units with integral plug.
Secondly, and more importantly, their EMC regulations are quite different to ours and it is my understanding that you can very easily built kit that meets the US specs with room to spare, but fails dismally when compared with EU specs. That's not a commentary on whether one system is better or worse than the other - just an observation that they are different.
because they are useless.
Wasn't it Ofcom that was supposed to protect the consumer from BT and Phorm? They actually protected BT and they are doing the same in this case.
Are Ofcom in the pocket of BT? Is it one of those situations were big business offers directorships or special jobs to regulators, because to offer a briefcase of money is illegal?
And when are Wikileaks going to release the M$ OOXML ISO information? That should prove interesting.
We paid for that fucking report so give us it now! You are our fucking servants you ungrateful, lying, corrupt, pathetic little fucks! I really cannot express my anger enough at these fucking parasitic criminals who take our money and refuse to work for us. Hanging would be too good for this bunch of pricks.
The whole fucking lot should go to jail for theft of public money -- since they're not working for us, but BT.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
