Depends on the system.. SCADA type radios have no problem with trees... On Sep 24, 2016 7:22 PM, "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> wrote:
> Might be worth a shot I guess. Depends how strong your 900 is coming in. > > Attenuation is attenuation though...whether it's LTE or something else. > If the path literally passes through a mile of trees then I'm surprised > even 900 works. > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/24/2016 3:45:44 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > And what happens when the noise floor increases and the eNB can't hear > those shitty CPEs anymore? Nevermind, that question answered itself. > > The boss keeps wanting to try an LTE sector at sites where we have a mile > or more deep trees (where we know 900 FSK barely works now, not only due to > power levels but noise floor too). My fear is that it actually does "work" > (meaning horrible mod levels) and he'll want to run with it. So we'll get > what, a couple Mbps out of a sector. Sounds a lot like 900 FSK. Sounds a > lot like 900 450i with a horrible noise floor. So we gain nothing and spent > a ton of money. Great idea. And we won't end up getting all of the > customers off of the 900 anyway, that I'm sure. > > On 9/24/2016 11:47 AM, Adam Moffett wrote: > > In Wimax it's 4x4....I'm pretty sure we'll have 4x4 in LTE as well, but > I think feature was released only a month or so ago. We have a few places > with split sectors, so we'll be able to compare to 2x2. > > From what I understand, LTE's frame structure is such that it can hang on > to a crummy signal longer than Wimax. It was explained to me that Wimax > puts the synchronization data in the pre-amble which has to be received on > every subcarrier, whereas LTE has that data interspersed among the > subcarriers, so where your weak wimax CPE sometimes cuts in an out, an LTE > CPE in the same conditions can stay connected. It also has lower mod > levels that let it operate right down to the noise floor. And at least in > theory you'll get more throughput than you get in the same conditions on > Wimax. > > I have the same reservations as you about the low mod levels thing. Just > because they work doesn't mean you want them. We're not intentionally > installing anything weaker than a -80 RSSI right now, so we really ought to > be ok on that front. > > -Adam > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/23/2016 11:23:57 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > Well, let me ask this. Are you doing 2x2 or 4x4 on the Telrad? Obviously > 4x4 would give a slight advantage. > > My whole thing is, OK, it might work through a shit ton of trees. Linked > up and able to move some traffic is one thing. But a whole bunch of low > modulation customers on a sector is not worth the investment. LTE, Wimax, > 450i 900.. whatever it may be. > > I know of a Telrad installation where they couldn't make it work. Turned > out to be interference. They had some guys from Israel come "fix" it. I > won't say any names, but I now see what they did to get it working. It's in > the 3.5 band.. because I can see them on my 450's spectrum analyzer. From > multiple sectors on multiple towers, so I know what direction it's coming > from. And I have no doubt they're running it over powered. > > Welp, we have a BaiCells demo kit, so we'll see what happens. > > On 9/23/2016 9:52 PM, Adam Moffett wrote: > > We've had Telrad Compact 1000's for around 2.5 years, but they're running > Wimax firmware because we were replacing older 16e installations. We have > a number of sites now that have entirely dual mode CPE so we're about to > pull the trigger on LTE. We're installing four LTE base stations next week > on brand new sites, and assuming those go well we'll upgrade some existing > Wimax sites. > > So yeah, within the next few weeks I'll know more. I'll definitely report > back. > > It's interesting that you phrase it as "if it works at all." The issue > with Wimax has never been it "working", it's just that it comes with a lot > of quirks and it sucks at administration and troubleshooting. I'm speaking > of Wimax in general here, not Telrad specifically....and I've used Wimax > from three different vendors now. I have no fear about LTE working. I > *am* afraid it will turn out to be cut from the same cloth as Wimax. > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "George Skorup" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/23/2016 8:04:34 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > Aren't you doing Telrad? Please let us know if it works at all. > > On 9/23/2016 4:05 PM, Adam Moffett wrote: > > I'll let you know in a few weeks. > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: [email protected] > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/23/2016 5:01:02 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > I wonder what LTE would do with the same RSSI. > > *From:* Adam Moffett <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Friday, September 23, 2016 2:46 PM > *To:* [email protected] > *Subject:* Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > Oh I also have somebody with a -88 who gets about half that. > 900 was the last ditch effort for both of these. > With wimax from the same tower we got a big fat nothing at both locations. > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Adam Moffett" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/23/2016 4:44:21 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > On the other end of the quality spectrum: > > > *Link Test with Bridging* > VC Downlink Uplink Aggregate Packet Transmit Packet Receive > Actual Actual > 19 6.07 Mbps 1.32 Mbps 7.39 Mbps, 474 pps 821 (410 pps) 128(64 pps) > That's a -85 on a 5mhz channel. On any wider channel I lose this guy. > > > > ------ Original Message ------ > From: "Dave" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: 9/23/2016 4:17:36 PM > Subject: Re: [AFMUG] 900 MHz PMP450i :: Any real numbers? > > > This is from one of ours > Current Results StatusStats for LUID: 3 Test Duration: 5 Pkt Length: > 1714 Test Direction Bi-Directional > > *RF Link Test* > VC Downlink Uplink Aggregate Packet Transmit Packet Receive > Actual Actual > 19 26.13 Mbps 6.78 Mbps 32.92 Mbps, 2367 pps 2389 (477 pps) 9450(1890 > pps) > *Efficiency* > Downlink Uplink > Efficiency Fragments > count Efficiency Fragments > count > Actual Expected Actual Expected > 100% 255254 255254 78% 84124 66231 > Link Test ran on 03:59:48 01/09/2011 UTC > > *Currently transmitting at:* > VC 19 Rate 8X/8X MIMO-B > > > On 09/23/2016 03:12 PM, Bill Prince wrote: > > We're looking at doing a forklift on a couple of 900 MHz FSK APs. What are > real world throughput numbers that any of you pioneers are getting? We > would probably want to do 10 MHz channels at first, and I would hope that > we could get > 15 Mbps in download, but maybe I'm being too conservative? > > The places we are looking at do not have Smart Meter issues. > > -- > bp > part15sbs{at}gmail{dot}com > > > -- > > > > >
