I guess we should also look at the tower install too. What is the rough cost to 
install 40 feet, Rohn 25?

Tushar


> On Jun 14, 2015, at 12:02 PM, Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Its mostly financial considerations…  we do whatever we can (payments, etc.) 
> to push them that direction.  It just makes the most sense.
>  
> Paul
>  
> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Ken Hohhof
> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 1:00 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> I don’t understand why customers don’t blink an eye signing 2 year contracts 
> on cellphones and satellite service, but resist investing in a Rohn tower 
> which is an asset with about a 30 year life and also gives them a place to 
> mount things like an OTA TV antenna, security cameras, etc.  Not sure if they 
> think it’s ugly, or just don’t make financial decisions for the long term.
>  
>  
> From: Paul McCall
> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 11:34 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> I don’t know comparatively Tushar.  We have found that 50mph winds for an 
> afternoon is all it takes to bend them.
>  
> Being on the ocean, we also see them corrode rather quickly.  2 different 
> brands of poles and within 2 years they are almost unusual, parts break 
> trying to loosen them to lower them etc.  They just don’t last and then whose 
> responsibility is it to replace them.  The customer doesn’t want to pay twice 
> that’s for sure.  The other problem is fine tuning… east/west is OK, but 
> up/down angle of a dish is a PIA.  320 CPEs are not as bad on a pole for 
> tuning, but the other issues really hurt us.  We would rather try talking the 
> customer into a Rohn 25 40 feet or a bit more depending on highest building 
> attachment point so that we are not guyed.  Even if we do that at parts / 
> labor cost, its much better long term, and easy to service the radio.  MOST 
> of the time, we are able to sell that at a $ 500 REAL profit, and a win-win 
> for all
>  
> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tushar Patel
> Sent: Sunday, June 14, 2015 9:43 AM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> I agree it is hard to service.  Most of the time we have two people to 
> install but one person to service, some time two. But how is it be different 
> in Florida than Texas?
>  
> We get enough windstorms, we deal with pole bent etc too.
> 
> Tushar
>  
> 
> On Jun 14, 2015, at 7:22 AM, Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> Push up poles in Florida is a nightmare waiting to happen. We learned that 
> the hard way.  Even with guy wires.  And, a pain to service.  Kinda fits your 
> description of NLOS customers below.
>  
> From: Af [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Tushar Patel
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 11:52 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> Your point on sector efficiency is the reason we no longer like NLOS 
> installs. Yes you may gain few customer with little less effort but in long 
> run it hurts. We try to install 40 to 50 feet push-up poles and get better 
> line of sight. 
> 
> Tushar
>  
> 
> On Jun 13, 2015, at 10:44 PM, George Skorup <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> That's great that it works. I'm sure the Telrad stuff and other gear like it 
> is excellent. For me, it's too expensive. Every way I run the numbers, I'm 
> looking at 16-18 months for break-even. And that's not including all of the 
> extra stuff required for a large scale deployment.
> 
> If I can't get 25-30 users per sector, the site is too small to deploy it. If 
> I'm running a bunch of NLOS customers (which we would since we're about 55% 
> 900MHz), lots of low modulation users really sucks for sector capacity. And 
> those NLOS shots, like Ken says, will they continue to work? When the trees 
> are soaked, covered in ice, etc., does it go to shit and I have to listen to 
> customers bitching because they were getting 20+Mbps and now get <5Mbps? 
> Which again is a hit on sector efficiency.
> 
> On 6/13/2015 8:48 PM, Ken Hohhof wrote:
> One thing I experienced with 3.65 GHz WiMAX was an install that turned out to 
> work only because of signal bouncing off the tall tree leaves, and stopped 
> working in November when the leaves went away.  We should have been 
> suspicious when aligning for best signal actually had the CPE pointed up at 
> about a 30 degree angle.
>  
> I have seen something similar with 900 MHz.
>  
>  
> From: TJ Trout
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 8:15 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> How does LTE penetrate hills? This is the second or third "through a hill" 
> story in the last week?
>  
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 3:50 PM, Patrick Leary <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> RSRP, it is a measurement. It is a truer number than RSSI, which is only an 
> estimate (so I'm told). As Ken said, basically add 30 to get an idea of the 
> RSSI value.
>  
> Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID
> On Jun 13, 2015 5:36 PM, Mathew Howard <[email protected]> wrote:
> Yeah... something like that. Notice that is -108 CINR, not RSSI, like the 
> numbers we're all used to.
>  
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 4:27 PM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote:
> I think Patrick said to add 30 dB to Telrad signal numbers because they were 
> “per subcarrier” or something?
>  
> From: Colin Stanners
> Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 4:17 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: Re: [AFMUG] Do you want to see this stuff here?
>  
> Patrick, I haven't been following Telrad but that's too incredible - I can't 
> see how -108, which is below the noise floor for any reasonable channel 
> bandwidth (20mhz+?) could get any reasonable speed, much less those.
>  
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 3:57 PM, Patrick Leary <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> Should I resist sharing this sort of thing? If it's out of line, let me know 
> Chuck.
> 
> <mime-attachment.png>
> 
>  
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of 
> Steve Discher
> Sent: Friday, June 12, 2015 7:51 PM
> To: [email protected]
> Subject: [Telrad] Another Telrad success story
> 
>  
> 
> Not to flood the list with these but Zirkel is having great results.
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> ************************************************************************************
> 
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by PineApp 
> Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer viruses.
> 
> ************************************************************************************
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
>  
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
> viruses.
> ************************************************************************************
> 
>  
>  
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
> viruses.
> ************************************************************************************
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> ************************************************************************************
> This footnote confirms that this email message has been scanned by
> PineApp Mail-SeCure for the presence of malicious code, vandals & computer 
> viruses.
> ************************************************************************************
> 
>  
>  

Reply via email to