Isn't it 21+18 max? Josh Luthman Office: 937-552-2340 Direct: 937-552-2343 1100 Wayne St Suite 1337 Troy, OH 45373 On Jun 6, 2016 10:52 AM, "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> wrote:
> only if the power is set wrong. > > On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 9:51 AM, Josh Luthman <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> Epmp is like 6 dB less power? >> >> Josh Luthman >> Office: 937-552-2340 >> Direct: 937-552-2343 >> 1100 Wayne St >> Suite 1337 >> Troy, OH 45373 >> On Jun 6, 2016 10:47 AM, "Mathew Howard" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> The only direct comparison I've seen with the same antennas at the AP >>> was the one Jerry Head mentioned here... and he wasn't able to confirm that >>> TX power was the same. >>> >>> The other thing that I'm wondering about is if the fact that the Cambium >>> sectors are dual slant instead of H/V has something to do with it. >>> >>> On Mon, Jun 6, 2016 at 8:43 AM, Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Someone asked whether the xmt power was apples-to-apples, has that been >>>> answered? >>>> >>>> If the antennas are comparable, it would seem the only explanations for >>>> different rcv signal would be xmt power, or calibration error. >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Chuck McCown <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent:* Monday, June 06, 2016 8:18 AM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> I think if I was cambium, I would have a couple of guys on a plane or >>>> in a car with a suitcase of equipment to visit you in the field. >>>> This was not the intended or expected outcome for that product. >>>> >>>> *From:* Josh Luthman <[email protected]> >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 05, 2016 8:17 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> Never really left. I would have to lose customers with epmp 2.4 wifi >>>> due to lack of signal. >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> On Jun 5, 2016 10:12 PM, "Paul McCall" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> So you went back to UBNT in 2.4? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman >>>> *Sent:* Sunday, June 5, 2016 9:57 PM >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No. I have no pmp450 in my network simply due to cost. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Sun, Jun 5, 2016 at 9:48 PM, Paul McCall <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> Josh, >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Have you tried 450 2.4 in the exact situation where ePMP 2.4 “sucked”? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* Af [mailto:[email protected]] *On Behalf Of *Josh Luthman >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 2, 2016 5:10 PM >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> No...it's not. The EPMP 2.4 radios just suck at penetration. I've >>>> done Ubnt KPP and IT Elite - they all performed terribly. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Josh Luthman >>>> Office: 937-552-2340 >>>> Direct: 937-552-2343 >>>> 1100 Wayne St >>>> Suite 1337 >>>> Troy, OH 45373 >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 4:59 PM, CBB - Jay Fuller < >>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> hmm, i will check into that. Pretty sure with ubnt we're using kp >>>> performance. With epmp, i think it is bundled antennas... >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>> *From:* Ken Hohhof <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:50 PM >>>> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Jay, I suspect the difference you are seeing may be mainly in the >>>> antennas. 2.4 GHz from any vendor should penetrate the same, the radio >>>> waves don’t care what brand radio launched them. And I think the >>>> difference between the platforms will be most evident in low interference >>>> environment where they can achieve their full modulation and throughput. >>>> With low SNR, I think it’s kind of like arguing Ferrari vs Porsche for off >>>> road racing, neither will be able to show off its capabilities. Receiver >>>> sensitivity and bits/sec/Hz won’t matter. >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> *From:* CBB - Jay Fuller <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 3:28 PM >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> >>>> *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Also interested in interference rejection of the pmp450 - is there any >>>> (in 2.4) >>>> >>>> we are getting better foliage penetration with ubnt 2.4 than epmp 2.4 - >>>> - and from the performance of >>>> >>>> the epmp 2.4 i wish wish wish it penetrated better! >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> ----- Original Message ----- >>>> >>>> *From:* Matt <[email protected]> >>>> >>>> *To:* [email protected] >>>> >>>> *Sent:* Thursday, June 02, 2016 2:25 PM >>>> >>>> *Subject:* [AFMUG] PMP450 vs. ePMP >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> We have mostly PMP100 and PMP450 deployed. Some Ubiquiti we tried and >>>> some we inherited as well. Have some ePMP we have tested but so far >>>> have not deployed more then couple test links. >>>> >>>> For those who have tried both ePMP and PMP450 what are the differences >>>> you have seen in performance? Interference tolerance among others? >>>> >>>> For those that have gone with PMP450 over ePMP what was the reasoning? >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
