yeah, we are the PCN is -43 and we are -42/-41 Everything tests fine, speedtests are great, full capacity. I wouldnt be concerned if it had been hard to get the link up.
we did full H/V sweeps on both sides, then fine aligned as normal. I just expected it to be hard to find the link and somewhat easy to use it. on the sweeps we didnt see notable side lobe peaks. just strange. Im really freaking happy with SAF on this though, great support from moonblink both pre and post sales, input from SAF sales and support directly, quick responses. I guess my only complaint is the product wasnt harder to use On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 9:27 PM, Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 >> > -- 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
