60 or 240ghz multipoint, with the massive signal loss due to not using
directional antennas, would have a reliable range of say 300ft? May be more
reasonable to string fiber, heck cat6 in most cases.
On May 29, 2015 5:49 PM, "Brett A Mansfield" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> 60 and 240GHz can make wireless in urban areas actually be able to compete
> with cable and maybe even fiber.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 4:44 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Id stay ahead of the curve. There is a LOT of spectrum out there going
> unused. For example, 60GHz and 240GHz. Yes they cannot go very far, but it
> seems none of the other high frequency stuff can either.  And these are
> very high capacity.
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 4:39 PM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  Maybe you can explain what you would do different than all the other
> manufacturers that would solve the problem.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
> Behalf Of *Brett A Mansfield
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 3:33 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTMP backhaul solution
>
>
>
> You don't need a lot of money to start manufacturing. You just need to
> know the right people.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 4:28 PM, Jason McKemie <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
>  I hope you have a lot more money than most people here...
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:23 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> Yep, it sure does seem that way. I'm trying to think outside of the box,
> but every time I do I get back to the same place. Nothing I can do this
> with is on the market yet or never will be. I'm getting more and more
> tempted every day to start manufacturing my own stuff. I've already started
> looking into that.
>
>
>
> Anything you guys would like to see come to market? If I go into
> manufacturing I'm going to be all in.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 4:19 PM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  You need a different strategy.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
> Behalf Of *Brett A Mansfield
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 3:18 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTMP backhaul solution
>
>
>
> You're very right about the 24GHz. I know several companies are working on
> something in 60GHz which would be ideal because it's not a very large area
> and can be daisy chained into a ring. 80GHz would be fine, but like you
> said nothing seems to exist. These CCS devices look great and might be
> exactly what I'm looking for. I just hope the price is right. They are 26
> and 28GHz. But I think Vivint has a bit of a monopoly in my area with all
> of their 28GHz radios all over the place. I'm afraid the noise would be too
> much, even with the narrow beams.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 4:13 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>   I'm pretty sure the FCC doesn't allow PtMP in 24ghz. I don't know if
> anything exists for PtMP in 80ghz... or maybe 60ghz?
>
> It seems like the only real option here is 28ghz.
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:04 PM, Rory Conaway <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> You can buy spectrum in 28GHz and use Cambridge like Vivato does or
> depending on how many clients and range you are talking about, maybe
> something in 24 or 80GHz.
>
>
>
> Rory
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 2:58 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTMP backhaul solution
>
>
>
> You know that's why they sync, right?  You can have a whole lot of sync'ed
> APs/masters at the one site and as long as they're transmitting at the same
> time and the client/slave sites aren't nearing the different master's
> you'll be fine.
>
>
>
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 29, 2015 at 5:49 PM, Brett A Mansfield <
> [email protected]> wrote:
>
> That is exactly what I'm looking for. I need something inexpensive
> comparatively and it needs to be PtMP. I could use airfibers if I could do
> PTP, but that would be FAR too many radios in one location competing for
> airtime.
>
>
>
> Josh, I currently use 3.65, but I need high capacity. 80Mb at best is not
> near enough.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 3:44 PM, Daniel White <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>  You’re looking for licensed PtMP backhaul?
>
>
>
> If that is the case, then CCS has a 28GHz offering with StraightPath.  But
> not sure what you’re looking at price wise.  You may just investigate
> multiple 23GHz shots or something similar depending on distance.
>
>
>
> Just want to make sure the request is clear.
>
>
>
> ***************************************************************************
>
> Daniel White - Managing Director
>
> SAF North America LLC
>
> Cell: +1 (303) 746-3590
>
> [email protected]
>
> Skype: danieldwhite
> Social: LinkedIn <http://www.linkedin.com/in/danielwhite84>
>
>
>
> ***************************************************************************
>
>
>
> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected] <[email protected]>] *On
> Behalf Of *Brett A Mansfield
> *Sent:* Friday, May 29, 2015 3:42 PM
> *To:* [email protected]
> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PTMP backhaul solution
>
>
>
> I'm looking for backhaul. Anything in 2.4 or 5GHz won't work.
>
> Thank you,
>
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
> On May 29, 2015, at 3:35 PM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>  EPMP and maybe Ubnt AC
>
> Josh Luthman
> Office: 937-552-2340
> Direct: 937-552-2343
> 1100 Wayne St
> Suite 1337
> Troy, OH 45373
>
> On May 29, 2015 5:32 PM, "Brett A Mansfield" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> I'm looking for the best high capacity and low cost PTMP solution. This is
> for my backhauls to distribute to smaller cells in a large area. Anyone
> know of something that fits this description?
>
> Thank you,
> Brett A Mansfield
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
> [image: Avast logo] <http://www.avast.com/>
>
> This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
> www.avast.com
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to