A CTM2 can power different types/voltages of radios in one chassis (24/48) and has internal DC/DC converters to handle this so that you only need to provide it +48V. With SyncInjectors, you will need to give them 24V to power 24V radios, or 48V to power 48V radios. This means you need separate SyncInjectors for each voltage requirement.
We used to deploy CTM/CMM, but it became simpler (and much cheaper) to deploy the PacketFlux gear. The PacketFlux gear also fits nicely on a DIN rail which is what most of our smaller sites use. It's much cheaper (and easier due to the modular design of the PacketFlux gear) to replace a $100 SyncInjector at a site than it is to replace a $1500 CTM if something goes boom. We have also had numerous management interface issues on the CTM-1. CMM4's are freaking huge (the non-rackmount versions) and expensive, and while we have a few of them in service, we won't be deploying any more. On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 2:26 AM, That One Guy /sarcasm < [email protected]> wrote: > We have been deploying the packetflux stuff as primary sync solution. > Other than the little bugginess with it, I'm very satisfied. > > We have a CTM that I think we paid 1700 bucks for, the night we deployed > it, we took a lightning strike and lost a port, so we have an AP > independently powered and synced from a parasitic. To clean it up, we have > to buy a whole new CTM, whereas with packetflux we would probably have only > needed to buy a syncinjector. > > We have a couple CMM Micros that have been tooling along for years without > issues, but I think we originally paid like 2 grand for those too. > > We have one deployed CMM4 and one on the shelf, handy because theyre > outdoor and have the switch built in, but that massive power supply makes > me want to take a dump on my cat, and I think their pricetag at the time > was like 2400 bucks, same issue with CTM, lose a port replace the whole > thing. Want to move up to a gigabit radio, buy a whole new unit. > > Little things like losing the module order, weird ways of firmware > upgrades and 10mb management, and no good way to monitor certain things in > Powercode don't really justify the cost of the other two solutions. The > popcorn is a selling point to, cambium doesn't give you shit. The > outstanding responsiveness to support requests and openness of the > manufacturer with packetflux is a selling point for me too. > > Am I missing anything that should be coming into the decision making > process here? The boss would be willing to shell out the cash for the > CTM/CMMs but that eats a boatload of budget. And it does require a certain > attention to detail to manage the packetflux gear, so if I were to exit, > would it be as simple as a fully managed solution for my replacement. > > Anybody here turn away from the packetflux solution for either of the > other two? > > > -- > 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. >
