Lot of boat WiFi 30 miles out on the water you're worried about? :P (Tongue in cheek.. Mostly)
On Nov 1, 2016 7:00 AM, "Faisal Imtiaz" <[email protected]> wrote: > Do you have that much freq /channel available in 5ghz to Burn ? (or > thrash for yourself and everyone else ?) > > Can one do it with 5ghz, answer is YES, but will it allow you to sleep > well at night day after day for long periods of time... chances are NO.... > > Whatever you can do with 5ghz, you can do with licensed 6ghz (take this a > bit loosely) yes the costs may be a wee bit different. > > FWIW, talk to the folks who are most likely have done something similar. > Cambium > Exalt > and possibly Radwin. > Ceragon (licensed) > > These folks have deep roots in working with Telco world, and as such most > likely have done long links over water. > > Just my 2 cents worth. > Faisal Imtiaz > Snappy Internet & Telecom > 7266 SW 48 Street > Miami, FL 33155 > Tel: 305 663 5518 x 232 > > Help-desk: (305)663-5518 Option 2 or Email: [email protected] > > ------------------------------ > > *From: *"Charles Regan" <[email protected]> > *To: *[email protected] > *Sent: *Tuesday, November 1, 2016 5:51:39 AM > *Subject: *Re: [AFMUG] PTP 60 miles 400Mbps > > That's interesting. Using multiple frequency and hope ducting affects only > some of them? How many DB loss from the multiplexer? > > On Oct 31, 2016 11:11 PM, "Jeremy" <[email protected]> wrote: > >> If you are already using AF5X, would this be a possibility?[image: >> Inline image 1] >> >> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 8:00 PM, Jaime Solorza <[email protected] >> > wrote: >> >>> We did a link from across the bay in Corpus Cristi with Tsunami 5Ghz >>> radios using 4 ft. Dishes using horizontal polarity. 5 story building on >>> one side and 120 ft. Tower at other side. These were 10mbps radios and >>> we got almost 100% across. All the other links on same roof and other >>> water as well used vertical polarity and had ducting issues. With MIMO >>> and all kinds of polarity options I am sure you can find a solution. >>> Antenna diversity must be engineered for path and conditions. Where are >>> you trying to shoot from? >>> >>> On Oct 31, 2016 6:39 PM, "Cassidy B. Larson" <[email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Did SAF try 6GHz? Or did they only try 5GHz? >>>> Seems a 2+0 at 6 would probably work at that distance.. although >>>> seawater is a factor I dunno about >>>> >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2016, at 18:32, Charles Regan <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>> Well here's SAF response: >>>> *My link planning team confirmed SAF does not have a viable 5GHz radio >>>> that can achieve your objective for this path.* >>>> >>>> Trango: >>>> *rough calculation suggests that even using space diversity will yield >>>> a 3 - 4 'nines' link (predicted reliability) at around 200Mbps FDX. The >>>> use of space diversity will also add considerably to the cost (a complete >>>> link might be upwards of $50K).* >>>> >>>> I'll ask SIAE... >>>> >>>> On Oct 31, 2016 9:19 PM, "Eric Kuhnke" <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> 20k? >>>>> >>>>> SIAE AlfoPlus2 6 GHz 1024QAM dual polarity link. Or two pairs of >>>>> alfoplus1 1024qam (single polarity) radios running in parallel, opposite >>>>> polarities, equal OSPF cost between routers. >>>>> >>>>> Or Trango's 1024QAM 6GHz radios. >>>>> >>>>> Why not SAF? I thought there was a 6 GHz version of the Integra now. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Mon, Oct 31, 2016 at 5:10 PM, Charles Regan < >>>>> [email protected]> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hello everyone, >>>>>> >>>>>> What would you guys use for a 60 miles PTP link? 400Mbps. Oh and it's >>>>>> over seawater... 20k$ budget. >>>>>> >>>>>> SAF, Trango both said sorry, can't do. >>>>>> Mimosa B5C with space diversity and 3k$ maybe. >>>>>> >>>>>> We do have a working AF5x with a 34dbi dish doing 150Mbps aggregate. >>>>>> The link gets bad sometimes because of ducting/reflection. >>>>>> >>>>>> How could I use two parabolics dish on different polarity with the >>>>>> AF5x for space diversity? Splitter? >>>>>> >>>>>> Should a B5C perform better or worse ? >>>>>> >>>>>> Charles >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >> >
