If your budget extends as far as an unrestricted-license version of the PTP650 in the 5.x GHz bands, you are in my opinion better served by going to a licensed part 101 type solution...
The PTP650 is the same price or higher than some 11 GHz licensed band full-link products on the market today, when used with 3'/4' size antennas. Get something that will operate in a single polarity, 40 MHz or 60 MHz wide channel, 1024QAM with ACM+ATPC and you will have greater reliability and throughput vs. a PTP650. On Mon, Nov 24, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Brian Sullivan via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > PTP 650 with Sync. > > > On 11/24/2014 9:51 AM, Gino Villarini via Af wrote: > >> Ptp 450 >> >> Gino A. Villarini >> @gvillarini >> >> >> >> On Nov 24, 2014, at 10:52 AM, Paul McCall via Af <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>> Cambium, >>> >>> Can you please make a suggestion as to what equipment that you recommend >>> to us for this type of problem/solution? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Paul McCall via Af >>> Sent: Saturday, November 22, 2014 12:32 PM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force >>> >>> For Cambium.... we have a very remote tower that feeds several other >>> towers. Everything is OSPF but logically... >>> >>> Tower R (the main remote tower - a 190 ft. Rohn 25G with several >>> anti-twist devices) is "fed" by... >>> Tower A - 26 miles away - UBNT 3.65ghz Rocket M5 AND a Mikrotik >>> RB912 5 Ghz >>> This commercial tower (Tower A) has over 300Mbit of usable >>> bandwidth and feeds about 75 to 85 Mbit to Tower A >>> Tower B - 9 miles away - UBNT 5ghz Rocket M5 >>> This tower (Tower B) is a 90 ft. Rohn 25G >>> >>> Tower R then feeds... >>> Tower C - 12 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 50 Mbit of usable >>> bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) >>> Tower D - 15 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable >>> bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) >>> Tower E - 17 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable >>> bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) >>> Tower F - 14 miles away - Mikrotik RB912 - 5 GHz - 40 Mbit of usable >>> bandwidth. (Rohn 25G 120 ft.) >>> >>> To get all this to work without Sync was quite a frequency juggling >>> act. There are other towers in the area and towers C, D, E, F connect >>> (chain) to each other on the "back side" and we use a couple 3.65Ghz UBNT >>> radios on the backside links. >>> >>> The challenge... >>> >>> First of all, I need more BW to each tower, but mostly Tower C. And, I >>> need better consistency... at times the links do not perform as I expect >>> and then I get customer complaints etc. I hate that. >>> >>> So, what would be the best solution that Cambium can recommend other >>> than a ton of licensed links? Obviously, the gear I am using now is >>> inexpensive. >>> >>> The PTP110 solution ... 2ms unsynced.... can it sync, now or >>> tomorrow? Latency with sync? >>> >>> Paul >>> >>> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Matt via Af >>> Sent: Thursday, November 20, 2014 11:47 AM >>> To: [email protected] >>> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] ePMP Force >>> >>> Hi, >>>> >>>> Please allow me to clarify. >>>> >>>> The Force 110 uses the Connectorized UnSync'd unit with the two 10/100 >>>> FE ports. >>>> >>>> The Force 110 PTP uses the Connectorized GPS Sync'd unit with the >>>> single GigE port that supports 802.3af PoE in addition to proprietary >>>> PoE. GPS capabilities will be disabled (but the radio can still use the on >>>> board GPS chip to track satellites and provide coordinates). >>>> >>>> The 2ms latency is achieved purely through software changes in Release >>>> 2.4 and will apply to both products. >>>> >>> Reading this spec sheet. >>> >>> http://www.cambiumnetworks.com/files/PRODUCTS/ePMP/FORCE/ >>> Force%20110%20PTP_Oct2014.pdf >>> >>> LATENCY (nominal, one way) < 2 ms (PTP Mode), 6 ms (Flexible Frame >>>>>> Mode) , 17 ms (GPS Sync Mode) >>>>>> >>>>> >
