Whos this Sergiu Guy? I never heard of him Do I get to hassle that guy now?
On Sat, Dec 13, 2014 at 9:21 AM, Daniel White via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > Sergiu Albu would be Steve’s SAF rep… but he doesn’t hang out on the list. > > > > I help all of my customers regardless of territory (since mine in North > America ;-) > > > > [image: cid:[email protected]] > > *Daniel White* | Managing Director > > *SAF North America LLC* > > > > *Cell:* > > > > (303) 746-3590 > > *Skype:* > > danieldwhite > > *E-mail:* > > [email protected] > > > > > > *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *That One Guy via > Af > *Sent:* Friday, December 12, 2014 9:06 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] aligning bigger antennas on short paths > > > > Jarrod Washington [[email protected]] > > really good sales guy > > we had a communication issue with the licensing coordination, was really > something we should have been more clear on because of the clustered way > our business structure is. but it ultimately resulted in a new FRN being > created instead of the license going to our FRN. He took ownership of the > issue and got it all squared away in no time. hes a rockstar. You see how > many questions i fire off on this list, you can imagine what that poor > bastard had to deal with with me having a direct line to him. > > > > Daniel White from the list here filled in the gaps. > > > > Im a SAF fanboy now > > > > On Fri, Dec 12, 2014 at 9:39 PM, Josh Luthman via Af <[email protected]> wrote: > > Only you, Steve :) > > Who's your SAF rep? > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Dec 12, 2014 10:34 PM, "That One Guy via Af" <[email protected]> wrote: > > 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 > > > > > -- > > 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
