Nah, school was still on summer break, but we still scheduled roughly 6 hour maintenance window with them as a courtesy, per site. Rather safe than sorry (length of time requested).
On Aug 31, 2016 7:22 PM, "Josh Luthman" <[email protected]> wrote: > Did you just do two crews to make the swap faster? > > > Josh Luthman > Office: 937-552-2340 > Direct: 937-552-2343 > 1100 Wayne St > Suite 1337 > Troy, OH 45373 > > On Wed, Aug 31, 2016 at 8:19 PM, Josh Reynolds <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> We replaced a bunch of UBNT 3.65 links with AF3X on rocket dishes a few >> years back for 5 or 6 sites for a school district. We ended up using half >> the channel width and doubling throughput over the Rocket 3.65s for that >> application. The district loved them... Very low latency for their VoIP, >> and it was an in-place upgrade. >> >> We did have to discard the RF armor box on the back I believe. >> >> On Aug 31, 2016 2:44 PM, "Ken Hohhof" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I have some 3.65 M series backhaul links to upgrade, I think it's 5 >>> Powerbridges and 1 Rocket. Not ready to go licensed on these links. >>> >>> Has anyone done a spec comparison or better yet field comparision >>> between Ubiquiti's AF3X and Cambium's 450PTP? They are fairly similar, the >>> AF3X is more expensive than the 450PTP because Ubiquiti prices it a lot >>> higher than the AF5X. Cambium has an integrated panel version of the 450SM >>> but doesn't seem to have the PTP version of that, otherwise it might be a >>> plus when replacing Powerbridges. And Ubiquiti doesn't seem to have a 3 >>> GHz version of their smallest airFiber dish, which would have been a plus >>> for AF3X. >>> >>> I don't see achieving max throughput on an AF3X since 30-50 MHz channels >>> don't seem usable. So that maybe takes away some of the airFiber secret >>> sauce. >>> >>> I guess another approach would be to use a 450 Lite AP and an SM, since >>> those are parts we already use and stock. Yet another approach would be to >>> use the lower 5 GHz bands instead of 3.65. >>> >>> >
