Some SCADA systems run at like 115kbaud with -103db receive sensitivity in a 1mhz channel... that will survive a lot.
On Sat, Sep 24, 2016 at 10:17 PM, Jaime Solorza <[email protected]> wrote: > 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 >> >> >> -- >> >> >> >> >>
