I have heard 15ish on a netonix port.

On March 21, 2015 7:18:58 AM AKDT, Bill Prince <[email protected]> wrote:
>I notice that the AF5X does not have a power consumption value.  The 
>data sheet is no help except that it says the thing uses 24V 1a POE 
>injector.  That implies a maximum of 24 watts.  So less than 24 watts. 
>
>Anyone have one installed that has measured actual power consumption?  
>If they're running the POE at 50% duty cycle, that would suggest about 
>12 watts.
>
>bp
><part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>
>On 3/21/2015 7:11 AM, Ty Featherling wrote:
>>
>> I did Bill with a little help. I posted it here and ok the UBNT list 
>> awhile back but no one seemed to notice. I intend to keep adding to
>it 
>> based on input from the community.
>>
>> -Ty
>>
>> On Mar 20, 2015 10:41 PM, "Bill Prince" <[email protected] 
>> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>
>>     Hot damn!  Who made that?!?
>>
>>     bp
>>     <part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com>
>>
>>     On 3/20/2015 8:13 PM, Ty Featherling wrote:
>>>
>>>     Oops let's try again. How about this chart...
>>>
>>>     ubnt radio comparison
>>>    
><https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/10BwvYDqrI4D8nmDRaNtfCeou0j2uZPMGIfXf9GB-cCc/edit?usp=drivesdk>
>>>
>>>
>>>     -Ty
>>>
>>>     On Mar 20, 2015 10:12 PM, "Ty Featherling"
>>>     <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
>wrote:
>>>
>>>         Try this chart.
>>>
>>>         On Mar 20, 2015 6:07 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]
>>>         <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>             Yes, charts are always good. Especially if the chart
>>>             would also have checkmarks for which U-NII bands they
>are
>>>             currently approved for.  And what power they take.
>>>             *From:* Ben Moore <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>             *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 5:51 PM
>>>             *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>             *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] splain the AC ubnt line
>>>             Yes, we do have too many variants.  It is being
>>>             streamlined in the AC line with NanoBeam, Powerbeam
>>>             (still will have multiple sizes).
>>>             NanoBeam = all integrated
>>>             PowerBeam = inner feed/dish design
>>>             It is a challenge with sku's since may sku's are needed
>>>             for different areas of the world (i.e. some products are
>>>             very popular here and not as popular in other parts of
>>>             the world).
>>>             Would chart help?
>>>             On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 4:43 PM, Ken Hohhof
>>>             <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                 Ben, you guys have too many product variants, and in
>>>                 some cases need better naming.  Like NanoBridge,
>>>                 NanoBeam, PowerBeam, NanoBeam AC, PowerBeam AC. I
>>>                 honestly don’t understand the difference between a
>>>                 NanoBeam and a PowerBeam, or why one has models by
>>>                 antenna gain in dB and the other by antenna size in
>mm.
>>>                 And of course the NanoStation Loco, why is it Loco? 
>>>                 Because it’s crazy small?
>>>                 Then there’s the M vs W thing.
>>>                 My head hurts.
>>>                 *From:* Ben Moore <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>                 *Sent:* Friday, March 20, 2015 4:13 PM
>>>                 *To:* [email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>
>>>                 *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] splain the AC ubnt line
>>>                 Here you go:
>>>                 Lite - No airPrism, will do PTP and PTMP
>>>                 PTP - PTP only, airPrism
>>>                 PTMP - PTMP only, airPrism
>>>                 These are split due to the filtering used for each
>>>                 (maximize PTP and PTMP performance). We won't split
>>>                 unless there is a performance reason to.  The cost
>is
>>>                 same either way...
>>>                 How much is the budget?  Consider AF-5X?
>>>                 On Fri, Mar 20, 2015 at 3:02 PM, That One Guy
>>>                 <[email protected]
>>>                 <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
>>>
>>>                     The current iteractions of the rocket AC line,
>>>                     these are the only connectorized units?
>>>                     What are the differences between lite, ptp, and
>>>                     ptmp airprism only?
>>>                     Are some of these shipping without all there
>guts?
>>>                     I am looking at replacing an old shitbucket
>>>                     tranzeo link, we already have it connected to
>one
>>>                     pol of a set of radiowaves 2 foot HP parabolics.
>>>                     I figure its worth checking out these AC radios,
>>>                     but I dont know whats what now, is this a
>>>                     permanent separation with UBNT of ptp and ptmp
>or
>>>                     is this two things that are going to converge?
>>>                     Other than the Ac component, for a low
>throughput
>>>                     demand link is there any major benefit of going
>>>                     to the AC over the M5 in terms of performance?
>>>                     (future demand is a factor as well)
>>>                     Also considering the epmp, goods, bads uglies
>>>                     between the three products there?
>>>                     -- 
>>>                     If you only see yourself as part of the team but
>>>                     you don't see your team as part of yourself you
>>>                     have already failed as part of the team.
>>>
>>

-- 
Sent from my Android device with K-9 Mail. Please excuse my brevity.

Reply via email to