If you got the signal the PCN states you're good to go. You can also do a speed test to verify your 300 some megs if you need to?
Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Dec 12, 2014 10:24 PM, "That One Guy via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: > yes. > you do understand my concern is that they linked up too easily? Im almost > thinking we could have just laid the antennas on their sides and they still > would have made a marginal link. If I werent so pessimistic I would be > excited about this. Im concerned when the ground thaws or something > everything will go batty > We have cut the traffic over to it. > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 8:28 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af <[email protected]> > wrote: >> >> Did u make sure they linked up in lab first? >> >> Jaime Solorza >> On Dec 12, 2014 7:08 PM, "That One Guy via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> the ground is frozen, pretty much all tilled farmland. Is it possible im >>> seeing some sort of multipath type madness that this thing just wouldnt not >>> link up. Ive had a harder time pointing shorter 5ghz links >>> >>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 7:22 PM, Jaime Solorza via Af <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> Slow and easy...slow and easy... >>>> >>>> Jaime Solorza >>>> On Dec 12, 2014 11:43 AM, "That One Guy via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> madness we are a little better than the target after fine alignment. >>>>> at one point we had the 4' side pinting to the ground abot 100 yards out >>>>> ant it still had about a -80 on the bnc readout >>>>> >>>>> On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 11:36 AM, Ken Hohhof via Af <[email protected]> >>>>> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Yeah, it was so considerate of AT&T to leave that dish up there >>>>>> when they sold off the site, only needed to be re-aimed about 2 degrees >>>>>> to >>>>>> go where we wanted. And they built a platform to stand on while aiming >>>>>> it, >>>>>> that was awfully nice of them. And they left the flexible waveguide down >>>>>> to the shelter. I’d really hate to think about hanging a new 12 ft dish >>>>>> ourselves and running waveguide to it. And it’s an Andrew parabolic, not >>>>>> the old WE horns, so we don’t have to worry about water getting into the >>>>>> waveguide and freezing. It doesn’t even look like anyone has been using >>>>>> the lightning bolt logo for target practice. Life is good when someone >>>>>> abandons nice stuff you can use. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Hardy, Tim via Af <[email protected]> >>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 11:18 AM >>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] aligning bigger antennas on short paths >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> HPBW for a 12 ft dish at 11.2 GHz is 0.5 degree. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Ken Hohhof >>>>>> via Af >>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 11:17 AM >>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] aligning bigger antennas on short paths >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Nope, a 4 ft dish in 11 GHz should be pretty narrow, a few degrees >>>>>> and you should be into a deep, deep null. Take a look at the beamwidth >>>>>> or >>>>>> pattern for your antenna. It should be similar to an 8 ft dish in 5.x >>>>>> GHz. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> We once used an existing 12 ft dish for an 11 GHz link and I kept >>>>>> having to tell the tower guy he was not going to be able to eyeball it. >>>>>> The beamwidth was something like 1 degree if I remember right. He ketp >>>>>> getting nada for signal until I made him slowly sweep the azimuth. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> *From:* That One Guy via Af <[email protected]> >>>>>> >>>>>> *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 9:50 AM >>>>>> >>>>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>>>> >>>>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] aligning bigger antennas on short paths >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> Weve never gone above 2' >>>>>> >>>>>> we finished installing our 11ghz link yesterday and had the antennas >>>>>> rough aligned, one side is 3' one side is 4'. I expected the tighter >>>>>> patterns would make it harder to find the initial link but they actually >>>>>> linked up right off the bat and it was right on the projected power >>>>>> levels. >>>>>> >>>>>> This is only 10 miles, so we have visual on the path. >>>>>> >>>>>> We did a little rough alignment yesterday, and will do the fine >>>>>> alignment today. when we we roughing it there was a good amount of travel >>>>>> on the antenna (4') side we were on and only a couple db change. do >>>>>> larger >>>>>> antennas on such a short path give you a little more leniency in >>>>>> alignment >>>>>> or something? we will do full horizontal and vertical panning today to >>>>>> make >>>>>> sure we arent in side lobes, just curious is there is more slop in this >>>>>> scenario. >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> >>>>>> All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that >>>>>> the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if >>>>>> you >>>>>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do >>>>>> not >>>>>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that >>>>> the parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you >>>>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do >>>>> not >>>>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 >>>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the >>> parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you >>> can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not >>> use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 >>> >> > > -- > All parts should go together without forcing. You must remember that the > parts you are reassembling were disassembled by you. Therefore, if you > can't get them together again, there must be a reason. By all means, do not > use a hammer. -- IBM maintenance manual, 1925 >
