That was the band of the radar I visited.

Sent from my iPhone

> On Nov 21, 2019, at 12:17 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> 
> That’s pretty cool.  The links to ULS are nice.
>  
> I had always wondered whose radar that was by Routes 47 and 64 your map tells 
> me it’s WLS-TV.  So if ULS says the frequency is 2900-2950, that means the 
> actual radar beam is in that range?  Not in 5 GHz at all?
>  
>  
> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Mike Hammett
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 1:05 PM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
>  
> This is nowhere near complete, but here is a map I've been building of radar 
> sites.
>  
> https://drive.google.com/open?id=1ayAnN9KSq09zKS8WCqaQ_QA3JrY&usp=sharing
>  
> It has TDWR, NOAA, TV stations etc. The private radar stations (mostly TV 
> stations) are the incomplete part of the map because I have to look them up 
> in ULS. It is complete in our area.
> 
> 
> 
> -----
> Mike Hammett
> Intelligent Computing Solutions
> 
> Midwest Internet Exchange
> 
> The Brothers WISP
> 
> 
> 
> From: "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]>
> To: "AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group" <[email protected]>
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 12:36:28 PM
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
> 
> Chicago has 2 TDWRs (for OHare and Midway) and both are in the 5600-5650 MHz 
> band.  I think a lot of WISP equipment actually locks out those frequencies, 
> and the only place a WISP would be desperate enough to use that 50 MHz 
> apparently is Puerto Rico, which is apparently the Wild West of spectrum.
>  
> http://www.wispa.org/Resources/Industry-Resources/TDWR-Resources/TDWR-Locations-and-Frequencies
>  
>  
>  
> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of [email protected]
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 12:16 PM
> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group' <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
>  
> Those radars sweep the sky pretty slowly.  Like 60 rpm.  It would be 
> theoretically possible to be on their frequency and just blank TX when it is 
> looking your way.  You could extract timing sync from the radar sweep and 
> figure out when to blank.  Their gain is such that you would only have to 
> blank for perhaps 50 mS. 
>  
> If I had more ambition I would ask for an experimental license to play with 
> the idea. 
>  
> From: Ken Hohhof
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 11:11 AM
> To: 'AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group'
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
>  
> Only the APs, at least under FCC rules, I’m not sure about the rest of the 
> world.
>  
> That alone IMHO says DFS is a joke, or regulatory “experts” deluding 
> themselves.  If I have a sector pointed away from some government radar, it 
> won’t detect the radar, but the SMs are pointed back at the radar and are not 
> required to have a detection mechanism.  Probably a good point that it would 
> be too complicated for one SM to detect radar and then communicate with the 
> AP to request a channel change.  But you really need something like a SAS for 
> this spectrum sharing idea to work.
>  
>  
> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Kurt Fankhauser
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 12:04 PM
> To: AnimalFarm Microwave Users Group <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
>  
> one thing i have always wondered is do the SM's actually look for RADAR or 
> only the AP's?
>  
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 12:55 PM Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yes, that’s true, but a higher gain antenna at the SM end helps rcv but not 
> xmt.  And SMàAP is the direction you may actually need a better signal 
> because the AP likely has a sector antenna and is mounted higher so it sees 
> more interference.
>  
> It would not be unusual to have a 16 dBi antenna at the AP but a 25 dBi 
> antenna at the SM.  The antenna gain would help the rcv signal at the SM, but 
> it would probably have to lower its conducted power by 9 dB to stay within 
> the regulatory EIRP limit.
>  
> In contrast, in U-NII-3 the CPE end is treated as point-to-point and can use 
> antenna gain to exceed the AP limit of 36 dBm EIRP (subject to OOBE limits).
>  
> From: AF <[email protected]> On Behalf Of Adam Moffett
> Sent: Thursday, November 21, 2019 11:27 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] dumb DFS questions
>  
> There might be something I don't understand, but I thought you had flat EIRP 
> limit of +30dbm whether it's an SM or an AP.
> 
> On 11/21/2019 12:11 PM, castarritt . wrote:
> 6 dBm loss for the AP transmit isn't the end of the world.  It's the up to 23 
> dBm loss on the SM transmit power that destroys the usefulness of DFS for 
> PTMP past a couple miles.  The ~16 dBi gain 90° sectors 2-300' up in the air 
> just can't hear those SMs over all the noise they are picking up.  What we 
> need is the ability to run downlink on DFS and uplink on 5.2 or 5.8.
>  
>  
> On Thu, Nov 21, 2019 at 10:56 AM Adam Moffett <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah I think on most equipment you can set alternate channels that are just 
> shifted over 5mhz from where you were.  And yeah I think the channel needs to 
> be clear for a few minutes before you can go back to it.
> 
> Assuming you don't really have a TDWR near you, I don't think DFS events are 
> that big of a deal.  My understanding is that DFS events are more likely if 
> you lie to the software about antenna gain to cheat the EIRP limit.  False 
> detects happen, but I don't think it's a daily event.  Disclaimer: I've 
> mostly used it on Point to point with dishes.  I'm not sure if you'd pick up 
> more anomolies on a sector antenna.
> 
> The biggest bummer is the EIRP limit.  When you're trying to get that 32 SNR 
> for the 256QAM then losing 6db kind of hurts.  Or when you've already got 
> someone hooked up 10 miles away and lowering the power ruins them. 
> 
> Where you really want to use DFS (In my opinion) is at a site where you have 
> a bunch of customers within 1-2 miles.  Unfortunately I don't have sites like 
> that.
> 
> -Adam
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> On 11/21/2019 11:31 AM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> We mostly avoid DFS frequencies on APs because of the impact if we get false 
> radar detects.  Also we are mostly a Cambium shop.  So I’m a bit confused 
> about DFS on other vendor equipment like Ubiquiti as well as home routers.
>  
> Question 1 – what happens when there’s a DFS detection?  On the Cambium gear, 
> we have to select 1 or 2 alternate frequencies.  But on other gear, I don’t 
> see this.  When there’s a DFS hit, does it jump to another random frequency?  
> Does it rescan the current frequency until it tests clear and only then 
> resume transmission?  Is the answer right in front of me and I’m being 
> stupid?  Maybe in the case of routers they are exempt because of low EIRP?
>  
> Question 2 – what about 40/80/160 MHz channels?  We have a competitor using 
> Ubiquiti gear and advertising residential subscriber speed plans up to 
> 100x100.  Clearly they must be using at least 40 MHz channels if not 80 MHz, 
> or else their marketing people have burning pants and long noses.  And I 
> don’t see how a WISP, especially one surrounded by other WISPs, could use 
> wide channels other than in DFS bands.  We have some PTP links using 40 MHz 
> but only 10 and 20 MHz channels on our APs.  So assuming you are using 40 or 
> 80 MHz in DFS, what happens when there’s a DFS detect?  Does the whole 40 or 
> 80 MHz have to find a new home?  Can it slide over 2.5 or 5 MHz and 
> substantially overlap the previous occupied spectrum?  DFS bands come with 
> enough spectrum to use wide channels, but is there enough to jump around when 
> you take a DFS hit?
>  
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>  
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
> 
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
>  
> -- 
> AF mailing list
> [email protected]
> http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com
-- 
AF mailing list
[email protected]
http://af.afmug.com/mailman/listinfo/af_af.afmug.com

Reply via email to